>be a kid who went to school>teachers throw a hissy fit whenever you do anything that isnt mindlessly regurgitating information even if you are genuinely learning and getting the correct answers on tests>makes me feel demotivated to do complicated math, fixiate more on programming>years later, no longer in school, decide to pick up complex math as an interest again>try to study on things on my own but everything feels like an alien language to me. and i know its not as complicated as it seems because every time i do figure something out its infinitely more simple than everyone would make it out to be (just like my experience with math in school)>but whenever i ask people for help they start sounding/acting like those teachers i struggled with where they'll just insist that math is completely solved and there is no reason to ever look at it from a different perspective, and that if i dont understand something despite it specifically being made to only make sense to one niche perspective, im just doing it wrong and just need to read 100 math books and drain my soul before i get to understand iti wish there was anywhere i could express my weird math ideas. nobody seems interested in experimentation and theres countless people who make it their mission to lecture you for ever trying to experiment and make your own formulas, its frustrating.
>>17010954To fix your issue of not understanding follow some sort of set undergrad equivalent curriculum. There are archives of charts posted on here or you can follow the MIT maths course.Make sure to read and understand the proofs that are being being shown to you in the lectures/textbooks, don't memorize, just try to get a feel for why each step is taken. And do all the exercises.This should give you enough formal maths experience to understand what the other people are saying. Also, if it all seems much simpler than other people make it, you could just have a much better mathematical intuition than the people you are asking for help need all that extra fluff to make sense of it all, or you could be tricking yourself that its much more simple once you get it.
>>17010971doing all of that for methods i dont have an interest in pursuing sounds quite draining desu, i dont really have the energy or time to force myself to digest standardized math, especially considering i cant help but think "there is an easier way to do that" or "there has to be an easier way to do that" throughout all of it, and my mind immediately wanders...i want to forge my own path as well, so even if i took the "understand standardized math magically" pill i wouldnt want to use itthe thing with it being simpler once i get it is that the concept in itself is pretty easy to grasp, but the way others describe it tend to be way more overwhelming and full of somewhat unrelated trivia or extra steps.so its like something that i do not know exists/is an option yet, and my only way to learn it is shovelling through tons of junk that actively makes it harder to understand for me.i do understand how it can be helpful for others especially if youre used to standardized math, but it sucks for me in particular
>>17010979Then just learn how to lay out proofs and show that your ways of doing something better are actually better and correct. No-one can lecture you for experimenting if your right.
>>17010954>i wish there was anywhere i could express my weird math ideas. nobody seems interested in experimentation and theres countless people who make it their mission to lecture you for ever trying to experiment and make your own formulas, its frustrating.Unironically, go talk to an AI.
>>17010954I have a PhD in math. You can add me on discord to share your math ideas: my tag is urist1334A lot of mathematicians spend the majority of time learning what others did and making minor additions to others work. Grothendieck was the greatest mathematician of the 20th century and constantly preached about approaching things from a point of view of innocence, ignorance, and childishness. Only from a state of freedom can we truly break out of the box and do something original.What you want to do is not adolescent at all: it is the state of being Grothendieck used to revolutionize algebraic geometry in the 20th century. However, if you choose not to learn the work of others you will be missing out on countless revolutionary ideas and centuries of mathematical experience humans cultivated.
>>17010954maybe stop being a pussy and punch your teacher next time
>>17010954Generally speaking 99.9% of the time 'weird math ideas' from normies are schizo shit or people not really understanding things, so others will default to that. Work on things on your own and try to understand whether that describes you or not, but if it doesn't and later you've got something actually interesting fleshed out then it'll be all your work and you won't even need headpats from others to validate yourself
>>17011085kys pedo
>>17010954Why don't you make a weird math general here on /sci/? I'd be very interested in it.You just won't find many free thinkers in the mainstream.
>>17011412if there is interest i'd love to, but it would be a little embarrassing if it was just me trying to reinvent wheels haha
>>17011417Brother I would definitely be a regular poster in your general, never be embarrassed to think differently. I am extremely interested in such strange number systems and things like that right now even though I'm not that smart. Even if it's just us 2 it would be at least enjoyable to me.We could start right now in this thread, what are some or one of your different perspectives on math? If you'd be so kind to share. I might not understand much of it but I'm willing to ask questions if you'll tolerate how stupid they might be.
>>17011431ok, sure!!>I might not understand much of it but I'm willing to ask questions if you'll tolerate how stupid they might be.of course!!! this is what ive currently been trying to create. something akin to quaternions?i did accidentally recrease euler's rotation method once. and im considering going back to it with my newfound knowledge on multiplication based rotation, since its a lot faster, however i feel like i can go even faster than that (a lot of my motivation is making my scripts as compact and easy to read as i can so i utilizing them can be efficient and fun)(a lot of people do try to convince me that its actually a lot more complicated and that i'll never be able to make a readable and simple version, but not only is that what they said about every other function i was able to simplify, if it truly were that complex it wouldnt be faster at all, so its odd that kind of insistence is a thing)its definitely not perfect, and i feel like if i *can* do a 90 degree rotation i could probably forego the second step entirely and just do a singular rotation, but its a proof of concept.i compare the rotation method to a moon orbiting a planet on a stake, and the visual of that is so enamouring that i keep chasing this idea.i think probably the biggest flaw with what im trying to do so far is that you can only really "point" at something, not exactly "rotate", so if you wanted to rotate "10 units to the left" or something you'd have to use sine (a useful but expensive function) to do so, there could be an alternative method but i think i'd be better finishing the pointing method before i build off of that idea more.
>>17011394wtf is wrong with you. You want me to kill myself? What have I done wrong? What have you done with your life? I am doing the most to make the most of mine.
>>17010954check the formulas for a circle, now check the formulas for a cylinder. thank me later
>>17011499Hmmm this is probably quite far beyond my math level but i'm trying to understand it.Your diagram seems to make some kind of sense, what are you trying to rotate "into"? Are you trying to move from one position to the next? Or describe a position or some degree of rotation? What is your specific goal here and how are you trying to do it? It would make it a little clearer for me maybe.Forgive the late reply my time is limited but I will keep replying when I can.
>>17011696sorry for the late response!!!!its kind of like trigonometry? (i think thats the word for it)like for example if the x position was farther away from the origin than y, then x would have a larger number than y, and if x is exactly 1 then that means you are pointing exactly along the x axistrying to rotate objects with this method is easy if you just want to point it directly in that direction (as if it were a 1 dimensional plane being rotated in 3D), because you can just set x y and z to (arbitrarynumber)*XR, (arbnum)*YR, and (arbnum)*ZR, but accomodating for an entire 3D position is more complicated. im still workshopping ideas.
>>17012256possibly my main issue is that math and programming are kind of two seperate sciences despite how much they compliment eachother. so when i try to learn how rotors or quaternions work, i can only know that they work, not *why* they work at an atomic level. (as in broken down to its bare essentials) because math resources, specifically about math and not concerning itself with programming, doesnt need to worry about making perfect sense to a computer and can afford to be abstract, subjective, or sometimes just flat out inefficient, since specificity and preformance are not concerns if you arent using a computer
>>17012256What a coincidence! I'm interested in coordinates right now, but i'm not that great at geometry.>like for example if the x position was farther away from the origin than y, then x would have a larger number than yThis makes perfect sense.>and if x is exactly 1 then that means you are pointing exactly along the x axisHmmm. What do you mean by "pointing"? What is it that is pointing? A straight line? Is the line crossing x at x=1? If so, then that line would only be pointing perfectly in the x direction when y is 0 wouldn't it? And if the y value was anything other than 0 it wouldn't be pointing perfectly in the x direction.I assume by arbitrary number you mean solving a graph equation to see where it crosses an axis? or am I wrong?Is your goal, or what you are solving for, a coordinate? an equation? a rotation? a value where it crosses an axis? or something else?>>17012278Yes I think you're right that math doesn't perfectly scale to computers, but I think that's actually because there's something different about a human doing math vs a computer doing math, computers seem to not be able to do things with math that humans can and vice versa. A very interesting subject for sure.
>>17012386Also I should add that AI is bridging the gap between what a human can do and what a computer can do with math, but there are still a great many deal of things a human can do with math that an AI or a computer can't.I even think Godel's incompleteness theorems are related to this but I may be wrong.
>>17012278Also.>so when i try to learn how rotors or quaternions work, i can only know that they work, not *why* they work at an atomic level.Perhaps you are thinking about it in the wrong way, as if quaternions and such things are actually real existing things that can be broken down into their real components like you can break down computing, you said yourself they are abstract and subjective, so why assume they can be broken down instead of just played with like a painter painting a painting, if you break down the painting into the atoms of paint the meaning of the painting is lost. And yet a painter painting a painting can paint something that describes in great detail something existing in the real world. Maybe you should treat your project like that instead. Just a suggestion.
>>17012386>Is the line crossing x at x=1? If so, then that line would only be pointing perfectly in the x direction when y is 0 wouldn't it? And if the y value was anything other than 0 it wouldn't be pointing perfectly in the x direction.exactly.>I assume by arbitrary number you mean solving a graph equation to see where it crosses an axis? or am I wrong?arbitrary number means arbitrary number lol, like, lets say there was an object that layed on x1, y0, z0, you could rotate it to whatever you wanted by multiplying its x position by the xr yr zr values, for the most part it functions as a "move in direction" script really.>computers seem to not be able to do things with math that humans can and vice versa. A very interesting subject for sure.its like language really, it seems impossible to translate at first but as long as you understand eachother, you can fluently "speak" to one another. this is my end goal when it comes to programming, where i can program in a way that is convenient and easy to read for both me and my computer.(inb4 "use ai", a computer doesnt actually "understand" anything it has been trained to spit out, and a person cannot look inside and define the exact logic that was used to reach a conclusion since its a network of thousands upon thousands of neurons. its like if you overworked a computer so it would speak more fluently in your language specifically, not what im looking for.)>>17012406>so why assume they can be broken down instead of just played with like a painter painting a painting,truee... i would reckon theres probably multiple different ways to do it.though to be fair, what im attempting currently is basically exactly that, my own weird little interpretation of them. but its quite difficult to translate the idea *to* programming.i probably need to better understand how those rotation systems work as an abstract concept, but its pretty hard to do so since its super easy to misinterpret the explanations..
>>17012749>arbitrary number means arbitrary number lol, like, lets say there was an object that layed on x1, y0, z0, you could rotate it to whatever you wanted by multiplying its x position by the xr yr zr values, for the most part it functions as a "move in direction" script really.Hmmm, ok kind of makes sense, i'll just imagine that as some kind of movement or rotation then.>i probably need to better understand how those rotation systems work as an abstract concept, but its pretty hard to do so since its super easy to misinterpret the explanations..It may be easier than you think unless it's like about quaternions or something then that's quite beyond me.Ok I was going to ask what your goal was again but I think I understand it a little better now.>this is my end goal when it comes to programming, where i can program in a way that is convenient and easy to read for both me and my computer.Yes that's a great goal and I've thought about similar concepts before.Hmmm, programming in a way that both computers and humans can read easily. It seems possible, but is it really possible? I don't think it could be like normal code right? The only real way I could think of doing that is with AI, but as you rightly said you can't just look in an AI and see what logic it used.
>>17013288>It seems possible, but is it really possible?well of course its not gonna be completely fluent in my language, but it would be written in such a way that its easy to understand.again its sort of like language, i'll write a rotation script, and teach the computer a "word" to run it.so if i say "rotate (x,y,z) by (a,b,c)" then it will understand how to do exactly that, and if im ever confused as to how it works, i can just go *into* the script "rotate (x,y,z) by (a,b,c)" and reevaluate how that script works to get a better understanding of it.
>>17013407Ah, I see, I still don't understand what you're actually doing though, 3D angles? Far too complex for me sadly.
>>17010954>i wish there was anywhere i could express my weird math ideas. nobody seems interested in experimentation and theres countless people who make it their mission to lecture you for ever trying to experiment and make your own formulas, its frustrating.Yes, that feel was already solved, your place is pic rel
