About

About

Hi, welcome to Intuitive Maths Blog!
This blog is an attempt to present mathematical concepts in the most intuitive manner possible and hence, help students understand and appreciate the beauty of mathematics. There are many other popular blogs, books & video lectures on different topics in higher mathematics already; what makes this blog different is the focus on developing “mathematical intuition”.
I take this opportunity to define “intuition” for mathematics. Intuition, in context of mathematics, is the ability to conceptualize a proposition about a topic, before actually reading its formal definition or proof. Thus, building intuition for a mathematical concept, involves unraveling the concept, layer by layer, such that each layer allows student to conclude something about the concept. So, the topic (concept) needs to be presented in a particular sequential manner, such that when the formal definition is introduced, it is close to student’s expectations . This is what I try to do through this blog.
There are certain implications of studying mathematics intuitively:

  • No memorization required: Yes, this is true! because the prime purpose of memory is to store the junk (non-assimilated stuff) in the mind; intuitive maths is not junk anymore.
  • Unconditioned thought process: Many times one approach doesn’t work. In such a case, normally a student gives up, because (s)he is conditioned to think in a particular way. This is like moving in train, i.e., you can’t stop between the stations. But when you study mathematics intuitively, you can pause and reconsider the assumptions under which you are thinking. Basically, you can think about multiple implications; so you can approach in different direction as you wish. This is like driving your own car and taking uncommon routes to explore more about the city.
  • Geared up for real research: Well, this is an obvious implication of the unconditioned thought process, described above.
  • Satisfaction: This is hard to explain. I would rather ask you to follow my blog and experience it firsthand.

Written with StackEdit.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Counting Insights Vol 1.0 K-to-1 Functions

Counting Insights Vol 1.0 K-to-1 Functions Let us ask ourselves a basic question: How do we count ? Suppose we have a collection of items. We assign to each item a number from in increasing order (of course starting from 1, then 2, then 3 and so on). The last number assigned is the value of the count (final answer). Notice that we can not assign the same number from to two different items. Thus, if we consider our assignment policy as a mapping from the set of items to , then it is injective in nature. Thus, we can conclude: When we count the number of elements in a set S, we are essentially establishing an injection from set S to . So, when confronted with the questions like: “ how many of the students in your class share birthday (day in week) with Ramesh?”, we can be certain that this counting needs an injective map from some set to . What that set is, how to arrive at this mapping? - before being able to answer these questions, we need to transform the prob
Read more

Counting Insights Vol 1.1 Pigeon-Hole Principle

Counting Insights Vol 1.1 Pigeon-Hole Principle In Vol 1.0 of -to- Functions, we considered the Devotee-Footwear problem , in which we asked: what is the minimum possible count of devotees present in the temple (exclude the priest)? Now a question arises that why there exists a minimum count (lower-bound) on the number of devotees? Can we prove mathematically the existence of such a lower-bound? Theorem 1. Let be -to- function, and let be finite. Then, set is finite with size . Proof : Since is given to be finite, let . Since is -to- . . To show upper-bound on size of , assume to be surjective. at most pre-images in . But at most elements in . Thus, . Note: achieves its maximum size only when is a surjection and every has number of pre-images. Let us now recall, = set of all footwears lying outside the temple entrance, and = set of all devotees present inside the temple, excluding the priest. We defined actual mapping that assignes e
Read more

NT Insights Vol 1.0 Axiomatizing Natural Numbers

NT Insights Vol 1.0 Axiomatizing Natural Numbers One can not prove theorems by assuming nothing. But what is more fascinating is that a large number of concepts can be explained by a fixed number of elementary notions, known as axioms . Axioms are assumed to be self-evident truths. One such set of axioms about Natural Numbers was proposed by Peano: Peano’s Axioms Let denote a set. Suppose we are not permitted to see its contents. Instead, we are given the following information about : A mapping , different from indentity map, such that is invariant under , i.e., Pre-image of does not exist under , i.e., there does not exist an such that The mapping is injective, i.e., If with and , then With these axioms alone, we can describe/generate the entire set , without actually seeing its elements. Let us see HOW . Let us start by analyzing what are we provided with. We are sure that there exists an element denoted by in . So is non-empty. Additional
Read more