| I'm going to try to give you something totally off the wall. Don't forget that mathematicians were people. Here's three biographies of some of my favorite mathematicians: http://www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/Biographies/Poincare.htm... http://www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/Biographies/Peirce_Charl... http://www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/Biographies/Smale.html Also, please check out some of the giants on that site and wikipedia: Gauss, Laplace, Euler. Why were they interested in what they were? What techniques did they develop? A very crucial question that very few ever ask: Would they have done much differently had they had access to a computer? (Of course). Focusing on proofs to learn math is very perverse. A proof in a textbook is a proof that has been refined an almost ludicrous number of times. Definitions and axioms have even been optimized for the sake of elegance of said proofs. Don't get me wrong, a connoisseur appreciates what has been done. However, removed from the problem that motivated this way of thinking, mathematical techniques can often confuse more than enlighten. What would you like to learn exactly? |
In the future some day I want to work in A.I. and create something beautiful with the knowledge I have gained. This is why I want to lay down the foundations to understand the beautiful advances in it I see around me.
Thanks a lot for commenting!