>>16868920
You will always be shit at math no matter how many books you read. You’re either good from the start or you aren’t.

>>16868920
Jumping on this thread because of similar question. So I made a schedule
Sunday/Wednesday
>Algebra
>Biology
Monday/Thursday
>Geometry
>Chemistry
>Tuesday/Friday
>Calculus
>Physics
All days except Saturday: Geology(most interesting subject)

Is this sufficient for the basics before I start my term next year or am I missing anything? I get that there's a lot of other disciplines but I don't want to overload myself either.

Are You talking about maths?
Do You have a nonmaths core?

>>16868920
just do memorization if you wanna do it fast.
There are only like four arithmetic rules, and even less calculus rules.
But calculus is algebraic not arithmetic.
If you actually want to be good at math try reading basic mathematics by serge meme.
And if your goals are to understand calculus then read read the easy calculus book by spivak, don't accidentally grab the harder book, it requires more maturity.
In all honesty I'm tempted to tell you to just go to Rudin, but you lack maturity with mathematical rhetoric.
I've been fighting my university to stop offering proofs and precalculus and just teach a mathematical rhetoric class using basic mathematics by serge lang.
They call me crazy, but I think everyone should have a handle over basic mathematical rhetoric.
When I have kids that's how I'll be teaching them.

>>16868991
It's too much, you're spreading yourself thin.
First of all you don't need to study sciences, it's all just memorization. So just focus on some core topics for categorization. What is alkaline? Get what I mean?
What type of algebra are you studying? Abstract? Linear?
Early physics is classical mechanics, memorize and study the first principles which is literally just a set of equations or physical rhetorical statements you can fit on one page.
This schedule looks like a total waste of a week.

>>16869007
So then what, it would be something like math-focused 6 days a week with a short time every day for memorizing science stuff?
>What type of algebra are you studying
I want to be so good at math that I can sleep during undergrad year 1 math classes I plan to do and still ace them. Well I'm not actually going to sleep but for me the science part is a lot more interesting than the math part. There's a reason the board is called /sci/ and not /math/ after all. High school was really boring so I left. I want to patch up on the math stuff I skipped out on and at least be adept at the basics. But really I want to dominate those classes. I'd rather sweat at home then in front of other students.
Realistically I'm aiming for basic competence (I can't put all my efforts into one field of math) so I at least know what the math professors will be talking about.

>>16869031
It's not my fault the jannies refuse to make a math and theology board called /math/
so for the time being you are stuck with my pompous arrogant opulent ass.
Science requires little to no thought. It's something machines could do, do, and would do much better. not even talking about AI, more like a sewing machine.
But either way science has nothing to do with thought(s), thinking, or rhetoric, it's about experimentation and measurement: COMPLETE ABSENCE OF MIND OR INTELLIGENCE.
But also to answer your question, no, that's too much math. Calculus literally isn't that big, unless you're doing proofs which you don't have an interest in.

>>16868920
>Any roadmap of books that I can practice and test myself from basic arithmetic to calculus?
Khan Academy is the best for this part. Book roadmaps are better suited for proof-based mathematics. You can skip most of KA videos and pick any openstax book or even better any physical book you have access to. The important thing about Khan A. is mastery of the interactive practice

>>16868924
fpbp