Is it a coincidence that many geniuses are good at mathematics

[Nemra]

For me the most interesting type of math is intuitive math. You are, sort of, more in touch with it.

Also, I loved questioning about the creation of formulas and I always wanted to know what was the initial insight that made mathematicians come up with an idea or create a specific formula.

[Yimpa]

6 hours ago, Moksha said:

In other words, Socrates was right about knowing that we know nothing. Absolute knowledge is only directly realized. It's beyond the capacity of any conceptual mind (human, alien, or god) to comprehend.

Direct realization has me dumbstruck. I’m honestly in disbelief, but not really…

[Leo Gura]

Socrates was a rat. I KNOW GOD.

Edited July 10, 2023 by Leo Gura

[gettoefl]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

Socrates was a rat. I KNOW GOD.

what is god though if not nothing ... nothing being the entire set of stuff that mind cannot conceive including itself

mind claims to produce something but as we know therein is the grand illusion

every something is a big fat nothing

thus everything is in fact nothing is and so that is what god is

 

[Leo Gura]

GOD is not nothing.

[Moksha]

7 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Socrates was a rat. I KNOW GOD.

Socrates was the most honest of philosophers. At least he admitted that the human mind can't grok god.

God knows itself, even while pretending to hide and seek itself.

[Nemra]

@Leo Gura doesn't everything include nothing?

[Sugarcoat]

On 2023-07-09 at 11:57 PM, thierry said:

When I say « real mathematics » what I mean is the good way of doing math to me. The effective way. The productive way. The way of doing math where you are actually doing real work rather than just superficially jumping hoops when everything deep has already been prepared for you. 

It would requires to come back to the very basis of maths. Having a very good theoretical foundation and then building your reasoning on a solid ground where you actually understand everything that’s happening. Understanding the demonstration of the theorems and tools you are using is very useful. You can spend days on that while your classmates will laugh at you saying that they just use the theorem and it is working and that you are just wasting time. The problem though is that when confronted with an exercise that requires you to visualise with precision. They ll be completely lost whereas people who did the real work will have a chance to see and solve the problem. 
 

But in most universities you’ll never have or very rarely have such exercices. It’s like maths is finding you way in the Amazon forest and maths taught in school are more likely to be a fake artificial forest where every interesting skills that are requires in the amazon forest are no longer useful and now you just need to learn that when you see this you should turn left and when you see that you should jump…

(ps: I might be a little hard though. maybe in the top top universities, something close to the real work can be done)
 

 

I agree with you??

There can be this natural need in us  to understand something from the bottom up before we move on to the next thing - (I’ve read this can be connected to autism which is interesting to me) which can as you say be seen as a waste of time from the point of view of others who’s brains work differently. 

 in school I find the pace is a lot of the time too fast and too many topics at once for one to have time to gain deep understanding of things, unless someone naturally understands quickly which we all don’t! A weakness of the system for sure. A lot gets very superficial