Quirk (
pastwatcher) wrote2006-01-09 07:03 pm
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
(no subject)
Thanks to all who took enough time out of their own exploding lives to give me encouragement.
I'm actually /happy/ about doing a Topology final and nothing else for the next three days, how weird is that? :)
I'm actually /happy/ about doing a Topology final and nothing else for the next three days, how weird is that? :)
no subject
Good luck on your topology and everything else :-)
no subject
And I'm sorry I seem to have let our story drop for now--must get back on that...after finals, most likely.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
But why the hell am I liking topology? It is EEEEEEEEEEEEEVIL!
Are you planning on taking Diff Geo any time soon? I want to learn that.
no subject
no subject
As for Com Plex Analysis, it is F***ing beautiful. Unfortunately, the course does not tell you that. But I suggest to read the relavant chapters in the new Penrose first, to get a sense of the beauty, and hold that in mind when taking the course. Once you get past all the "does this series converge" crap, and when you are not saying, "which messed up contour do I need to integrate on", the theorems are really quite clean. There are many fewer messy functions on the Reimann Sphere than on the real line.
no subject
Yay! I should remember to do that over Intersession, though I may not actually have the book at that point (though I could my friend Con for it)...remind me at Vericon?
Thank you!
no subject
If I remember, I will bring my Penrose up to Vericon.
Note: Penrose is not a Com Plex Analysis book, not any other textbook. It is a physics book for laypersons. The first half of this 1200 page book tries to teach someone with a Folk&Myth degree all the math that they need in order to understand physics. And by physics, I means string theory and beyond. He does a nice job of explaining a lot of the major theorems and how they relates to each other, without getting bogged down in the detail of proof.
no subject
no subject
Basically, I find it a bunch of tools that can be used to study interesting problems, but with little inherent beauty or interest in itself. Much like Real Analysis in that respect.
Another thing is that I like my sets to have powerful structure on them, and a general topological structure is not enough. This is one of the reasons I am so keen to learn me some diff geo. Whole loads of structure we can throw on there.