Difference between revisions of "Talk:Majoring in Mathematics"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Liberal bias)
Line 1: Line 1:
This is an extremely rough outline for this new article.  I will continue to expand it over the next few weeks based on feedback about the appropriateness of the problems and other suggestions for improvements.  Please let me know what you think! --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 23:12, 4 October 2009 (EDT)
+
<nowiki>This is an extremely rough outline for this new article.  I will continue to expand it over the next few weeks based on feedback about the appropriateness of the problems and other suggestions for improvements.  Please let me know what you think! --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 23:12, 4 October 2009 (EDT)
 
::well I was a math  major in college many years ago (before Rubic's cube!)  Suggest adding statistics.  
 
::well I was a math  major in college many years ago (before Rubic's cube!)  Suggest adding statistics.  
 
:::Ah, good idea.  At my undergrad school mathematics and statistics were separate programs, but I guess this isn't typical.  I'll throw in a new section.  I'm not much for statistics -- can anyone suggest some good problems? --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 23:20, 4 October 2009 (EDT)
 
:::Ah, good idea.  At my undergrad school mathematics and statistics were separate programs, but I guess this isn't typical.  I'll throw in a new section.  I'm not much for statistics -- can anyone suggest some good problems? --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 23:20, 4 October 2009 (EDT)
Line 24: Line 24:
 
:::I'm not sure I see the "crucial difference" you're seeing. I don't know what you mean by saying that homomorphisms  "allow[] groups that are different . . . to be treated as equal." What do you mean by "treated as equal"? Obviously, if a homomorphism exists between two groups it shows that there are certain structural similarities between the two groups, but this hardly means that they are equal. The fact that 124 and 490 are both even shows that there are certain similarities between them (namely that each includes 2 in its prime factorization), but that doesn't mean we treat them as equal and it certainly isn't evidence that evenness is the result of some sort of liberal bias. <small>Also, I think you have your examples backwards. Bat (animal) is a homophone with bat (sports) because both are pronounced the same but have different meanings. Wind (air flow) is not a homophone with wind (watches) because the pronunciation differs. They are, however, homographs.</small> --[[User:JustinD|JustinD]] 01:23, 26 February 2012 (EST)
 
:::I'm not sure I see the "crucial difference" you're seeing. I don't know what you mean by saying that homomorphisms  "allow[] groups that are different . . . to be treated as equal." What do you mean by "treated as equal"? Obviously, if a homomorphism exists between two groups it shows that there are certain structural similarities between the two groups, but this hardly means that they are equal. The fact that 124 and 490 are both even shows that there are certain similarities between them (namely that each includes 2 in its prime factorization), but that doesn't mean we treat them as equal and it certainly isn't evidence that evenness is the result of some sort of liberal bias. <small>Also, I think you have your examples backwards. Bat (animal) is a homophone with bat (sports) because both are pronounced the same but have different meanings. Wind (air flow) is not a homophone with wind (watches) because the pronunciation differs. They are, however, homographs.</small> --[[User:JustinD|JustinD]] 01:23, 26 February 2012 (EST)
 
::::Haha you are absolutely right, my apologies.  I thought I had picked a word specifically with no homophones.  Allow me to elaborate: saying that 124 and 490 are both even emphasizes similarities which is fine.  But consider a statement like "there is only one group of order 3."  There are clearly many, because you can define one on any set with 3 elements.  Nevertheless, you will never hear discussion of the many different groups of order 3, they are all lumped together because of homomorphisms.  Compare this with the professor value of refusing to distinguish between men and women.  To say men and women are both children of God is to discuss similarities while acknowledging differences, as in saying 124 and 490 are both even.  To say men and women are basically the same, as universities today do, is consistent with saying that groups are essentially the same.  I hope that clarifies what I was struggling to say before. --[[User:Bogart12|Bogart12]]
 
::::Haha you are absolutely right, my apologies.  I thought I had picked a word specifically with no homophones.  Allow me to elaborate: saying that 124 and 490 are both even emphasizes similarities which is fine.  But consider a statement like "there is only one group of order 3."  There are clearly many, because you can define one on any set with 3 elements.  Nevertheless, you will never hear discussion of the many different groups of order 3, they are all lumped together because of homomorphisms.  Compare this with the professor value of refusing to distinguish between men and women.  To say men and women are both children of God is to discuss similarities while acknowledging differences, as in saying 124 and 490 are both even.  To say men and women are basically the same, as universities today do, is consistent with saying that groups are essentially the same.  I hope that clarifies what I was struggling to say before. --[[User:Bogart12|Bogart12]]
:::::They key point you are missing, however, is that in many, many subjects, such as in mathematical aptitude, there is no functional difference between male and female. So yes, in many situations, women and men are essentially the same.[[User:KenShomer|KenShomer]] 15:15, 26 February 2012 (EST)
+
:::::They key point you are missing, however, is that in many, many subjects, such as in mathematical aptitude, there is no functional difference between male and female. So yes, in many situations, women and men are essentially the same.[[User:KenShomer|KenShomer]] 15:15, 26 February 2012 (EST)</nowiki>

Revision as of 20:17, February 26, 2012

This is an extremely rough outline for this new article. I will continue to expand it over the next few weeks based on feedback about the appropriateness of the problems and other suggestions for improvements. Please let me know what you think! --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 23:12, 4 October 2009 (EDT) ::well I was a math major in college many years ago (before Rubic's cube!) Suggest adding statistics. :::Ah, good idea. At my undergrad school mathematics and statistics were separate programs, but I guess this isn't typical. I'll throw in a new section. I'm not much for statistics -- can anyone suggest some good problems? --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 23:20, 4 October 2009 (EDT) Tremendous work, Mark. I'll try to add something for probability or statistics, which I studied.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:22, 4 October 2009 (EDT) :Great, thanks. These are subjects in which I'm inexpert. Now I'm inclined to move Probability/Statistics to a "field" along with algebra, analysis, etc. Please add a nice problem or theorem if you have any in mind! --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 23:24, 4 October 2009 (EDT) Terrific analysis on what college mathematics is not. That should be required reading for many seeking to major in math!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:30, 15 October 2009 (EDT) Why is there no mention of the bible or theology in this article? It should be mentioned, as it is in [[Axiom_of_Infinity]], that the notion of an infinite set is somewhat blasphemous. [[User:Tomkup32|Tomkup32]] 10:58, 9 December 2009 (EST) For Bezout's theorem, you have some inaccurate claims: the line x+y=0 and x+y=1 never interset. We need to move to projective space for the degree of the intersection to be exactly mn. == Liberal bias == How can there be liberal bias in math? Does saying 1+1 = 2 have a motive?[[User:SusanP|SusanP]] 23:29, 9 February 2012 (EST) :College math is not completely immune to liberal influences that have destroyed other subjects like physics.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:37, 9 February 2012 (EST) :Can you give an example of liberal bias in math? --[[User:Bogart12|Bogart12]] :Possible liberal bias--the study of so-called "homomorphisms" in modern liberal algebra could be part of the gay agenda?--[[User:Bogart12|Bogart12]] ::No, sorry, that's absurd and I think you know it. "Homo" simply means same and is used in a wide variety of contexts that have nothing to do with liberal bias. Is homogenized milk liberal bias? Or homonyms? Homophones? I've already reverted your addition to the article once, so I won't do it again just yet, but please consider removing or modifying it yourself.--[[User:JustinD|JustinD]] 19:32, 24 February 2012 (EST) ::There is a crucial difference between your examples and my claim. A homophone describes two words sounding the same but being different. Bat is not a homophone with bat, that doesn't make sense. Saying wind and wind are homophones acknowledges that they sound the same but are different words. A homomorphism allows groups that are different, like Z_2xZ_2 and the Klein four group, to be treated as equal. Additionally the global warming obsession is prolific. I didn't mean my writing to sound flippant, and perhaps its tone can be improved, but it was certainly not meant as a joke. :::I'm not sure I see the "crucial difference" you're seeing. I don't know what you mean by saying that homomorphisms "allow[] groups that are different . . . to be treated as equal." What do you mean by "treated as equal"? Obviously, if a homomorphism exists between two groups it shows that there are certain structural similarities between the two groups, but this hardly means that they are equal. The fact that 124 and 490 are both even shows that there are certain similarities between them (namely that each includes 2 in its prime factorization), but that doesn't mean we treat them as equal and it certainly isn't evidence that evenness is the result of some sort of liberal bias. <small>Also, I think you have your examples backwards. Bat (animal) is a homophone with bat (sports) because both are pronounced the same but have different meanings. Wind (air flow) is not a homophone with wind (watches) because the pronunciation differs. They are, however, homographs.</small> --[[User:JustinD|JustinD]] 01:23, 26 February 2012 (EST) ::::Haha you are absolutely right, my apologies. I thought I had picked a word specifically with no homophones. Allow me to elaborate: saying that 124 and 490 are both even emphasizes similarities which is fine. But consider a statement like "there is only one group of order 3." There are clearly many, because you can define one on any set with 3 elements. Nevertheless, you will never hear discussion of the many different groups of order 3, they are all lumped together because of homomorphisms. Compare this with the professor value of refusing to distinguish between men and women. To say men and women are both children of God is to discuss similarities while acknowledging differences, as in saying 124 and 490 are both even. To say men and women are basically the same, as universities today do, is consistent with saying that groups are essentially the same. I hope that clarifies what I was struggling to say before. --[[User:Bogart12|Bogart12]] :::::They key point you are missing, however, is that in many, many subjects, such as in mathematical aptitude, there is no functional difference between male and female. So yes, in many situations, women and men are essentially the same.[[User:KenShomer|KenShomer]] 15:15, 26 February 2012 (EST)