Is it time to drop out?
>>17088391the top just says how small the step size needs to be to reach a certain value on the function
>>17088391real analysis is hard but it’s doable. In my day I sat in the library quietly for like a few hours every day to do my homework assignments out of Baby Rudin (great book btw). It was one of the only times in my life I felt consistently rewarded that I could literally think about a problem that was stumping me for 45 minutes or an hour but finally start to figure it out and then come up with a very clean proof with some nice intuition behind it. Hard but doable
>>17088391Anyone who is distressed by real analysis should chill the fuck out. This shit was the hard-won solution to one of the biggest sets of philosophical controversies in mathematics until the latter 19th century. Who thought it would be easy?If you accept that this shit is hard and appreciate it for that, then you will have fun making your way through these difficult and creative areas of human thought.
>>17088391Yes. It only gets worse from there.>muh rigorNobody cares. No, really, nobody but mathematicians care. Serves no practical purpose whatsoever.Pure mathematics is just intellectual masturbation.
>>17088590well i simply disagree. many good and beneficial things "fall out" for free simply by enforcing rigor. or, in different terms - if you're sloppy about expressing an idea it's much harder for the core of the idea to be put forth. surely if you've ever published anything you know the effect that going over a draft iteratively has on making your original idea even better. and when you get everything in your argument/construction to be lean, mean, and precise you get that really satisfying notion of "this argument is clear, concise and the best version of itself, as far as this approach is concerned". tl;dr yes, nobody cares, but it does serve a purpose
>>17088590The rigor is how literally all other STEM fields can trust that their models won't end up having a seizure for some unknown reason. Only a complete amoeba would fail to understand why having a secure foundation for the sciences is important.>>17088447See this for remark about the old controversies.
>>17088590>>17088658rigor is not well defined
>>17088447it's only hard because education insists on teaching math to K6 in the same as in the 18th century
>>17088683It's taught the opposite way actually. We started to calculate differentials and integrals way before thinking about concepts of continuity.
>>17088658>Be physics Chad>Do qft >Work in 3.888975 dimensions >Subtract infinity from infinity >Get finite results >10 sig fig precision>Most precisely tested model in all of science >It just werks bro>Be mathematician >Seethe scoff and scream at qft>But my rigor>Say qft isn't well founded Hey, mathqueer. If science fails without your faggy rigor, why is the best model in all of science one that lacks your rigor so much that you cry yourselves to sleep over it?
>>17089151Physicists are actively involved in this with the mathematicians. Also stop schizobabbling and go back to your popsci books.
>>17088680says you retard
>>17089151openai made qft rigorous i believe? there's a lean file for it even
>>17089165i notice how you didnt say i was wrong
>>17089167That they only shared with David Gross and like 3 other people from MIT/Caltech/Harvard. The jury is still out on that and I suspect it will be questionable at best
>>17089287>I need to be explicitly told something to understand itYour reading comprehension is as poor as your understanding of mathematical rigor retard.
>If I can draw it without picking my pen up, it's continuous.
>>17088391Isn't the top one the explanation given in most calculus I classes?
>>17088391Yes, that's the correct time to fuck off.If you have trouble with that, you'll be raped in multivariate calculus and complex analysis.
>>17090217I dont remember ever seeing the notation for relations in calc 1. Matter fact I dont remember seeing the symbol for the set of real numbers either
>>17090078the middle line looks slightly curved, and the turns dont look sharp enough
