Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Cyberchat > Non-Actuarial Topics
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

ACTUARIAL SALARY SURVEYS
Contact DW Simpson for a Personalized Salary Survey

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #31  
Old 09-23-2019, 11:41 AM
dgtatum's Avatar
dgtatum dgtatum is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Louisville, KY
Favorite beer: San Pelligreno
Posts: 3,848
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A Student View Post
Auto-correct is the new Freud?
If it's your phone it's probably a heck of a lot more Freudian than you want us to know.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 09-23-2019, 12:12 PM
JollyGoodFCAS's Avatar
JollyGoodFCAS JollyGoodFCAS is offline
Member
CAS AAA
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Earth (most of the time)
Favorite beer: Beer-Sheva
Posts: 37,044
Default

Freshman year of college I struggled through vector calculus - material was way too abstract for me. Also barely passed operations research, but that was due in large part to the professor's teaching/testing style. I tried very hard to avoid this course but no such luck due to a schedule conflict. I heard that they stopped letting him teach courses after I graduated.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by lit041000 View Post
FCAS is the yoda of puns. He sprinkles little treasures when the pun gods smile upon us
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 09-23-2019, 12:16 PM
working girl's Avatar
working girl working girl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,465
Default

Don't ask me to do a proof.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 09-23-2019, 12:19 PM
Sredni Vashtar's Avatar
Sredni Vashtar Sredni Vashtar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Favorite beer: pilseners
Posts: 8,895
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Polymath View Post
I much prefered physics to math. Its a helluva more interesting to me.
There's not much of a difference IMO. Every level of physics requires some equally intense level of pure math.
ie. you can't touch EM without vector calc...
You can't touch basic engineering without PDEs.
You can't touch QM without fourier analysis, complex analysis, real analysis, etc.
You can't touch Fluid dynamics without tensor calculus...
You can't touch GR without reimannian geometry, differential geometry, etc.
__________________
L’humour est la politesse du désespoir

Last edited by Sredni Vashtar; 09-23-2019 at 12:22 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 09-23-2019, 12:24 PM
tommie frazier tommie frazier is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Favorite beer: The kind with 2 e's
Posts: 23,275
Default

never used much of trig or multivariable calc (calc 3). So...not very good at them.

did not like graduate courses in linear algebra that much. had a course in semigroups that was a lot rougher than I wanted but it was taught by a very hard ex-soviet guy who had no capacity or time for those who didn't get it right away.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 09-23-2019, 12:31 PM
The_Polymath's Avatar
The_Polymath The_Polymath is offline
Member
CAS SOA
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sredni Vashtar View Post
There's not much of a difference IMO. Every level of physics requires some equally intense level of pure math.
ie. you can't touch EM without vector calc...
You can't touch basic engineering without PDEs.
You can't touch QM without fourier analysis, complex analysis, real analysis, etc.
You can't touch Fluid dynamics without tensor calculus...
You can't touch GR without reimannian geometry, differential geometry, etc.
There is in the sense that you are actually solving real problems.

Like for example, how would you plot a course from the earth to say.....the sun, using gravity-assisted spaceflight and utilising a specific type of fuel?

Problems like this give you something concrete to solve.

A math problem is just math. You can't visualise a solution to the real life problem because it is simply abstract. Its like solving non-linear PDEs in class. You get a solution and thats it. What does that solve? Nothing. Just an abstract math problem.
__________________
Quote:
Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 09-23-2019, 12:31 PM
Dr T Non-Fan Dr T Non-Fan is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Just outside of Nowhere
Posts: 97,548
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by twig93 View Post
I could not recite the Law Of Cosines without first looking it up and I am certified to TEACH trigonometry.
The important thing is that you know where to find it.
(wiki is pretty good at math stuff.)

Same as actuarial exam stuff that you might need one day.
__________________
"Facebook is a toilet." -- LWTwJO

"45 es un titere" -- Seal of The President of The United States of America protest art
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 09-23-2019, 12:36 PM
Childish Gambino's Avatar
Childish Gambino Childish Gambino is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 31,504
Default

I had to drop differential geometry. That class was a head trip.

I was good at all the other math though, theory and applied.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by pete5383 View Post
if you supported Trump, you should be profoundly embarrassed by your poor decision making.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 09-23-2019, 12:43 PM
Vorian Atreides's Avatar
Vorian Atreides Vorian Atreides is offline
Wiki/Note Contributor
CAS
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: As far as 3 cups of sugar will take you
Studying for ACAS
College: Hard Knocks
Favorite beer: Most German dark lagers
Posts: 66,437
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sredni Vashtar View Post
There's not much of a difference IMO. Every level of physics requires some equally intense level of pure math.
ie. you can't touch EM without vector calc...
You can't touch basic engineering without PDEs.
You can't touch QM without fourier analysis, complex analysis, real analysis, etc.
You can't touch Fluid dynamics without tensor calculus...
You can't touch GR without reimannian geometry, differential geometry, etc.
But there are areas of pure math that have very little to do (currently) with "real world applications".
__________________
I find your lack of faith disturbing

Why should I worry about dying? It’s not going to happen in my lifetime!


Freedom of speech is not a license to discourtesy

#BLACKMATTERLIVES
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 09-23-2019, 01:01 PM
Sredni Vashtar's Avatar
Sredni Vashtar Sredni Vashtar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Favorite beer: pilseners
Posts: 8,895
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Polymath View Post
There is in the sense that you are actually solving real problems.

Like for example, how would you plot a course from the earth to say.....the sun, using gravity-assisted spaceflight and utilising a specific type of fuel?

Problems like this give you something concrete to solve.

A math problem is just math. You can't visualise a solution to the real life problem because it is simply abstract. Its like solving non-linear PDEs in class. You get a solution and thats it. What does that solve? Nothing. Just an abstract math problem.
Hmm, not sure I ever solved PDEs in a class that wasn't engineering focused.

But yes I agree pure math is more like riddles and poems, and feels purposeless.

That said I bet your Kerbal problem is done 99% with computers these days.
__________________
L’humour est la politesse du désespoir
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.24568 seconds with 11 queries