Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

Geometry of Machine Learning Models - Gaussian Process Kernel In 1948 Norbert Wiener framed prediction as a correlation problem, and in the 1970s George Wahba clarified that picking a smoothness preference is the same as picking a kernel. The motivation is that whenever data i s sparse and noisy,... show more

Mathelirium

34,440 subscribers

15,625 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

We often hear that machine learning models "learn patterns in data". But what does that actually look like in geometry? If you dropped a little elastic mesh into a cloud of points and let it learn, how would it fold itself to match the shape of the data? In this scene we watch a self-organizing map...a simple unsupervised neural model...learn the shape of a two-dimensional dataset arranged in a spiral arm. On top of this, we lay down a square grid of neurons whose weights live in the same plane. At the start, this grid is just a flat net floating across the cloud...it knows nothing about the structure underneath. Learning is a repeated game: pick a random data point, find the neuron whose weight is closest, and then nudge that neuron and its neighbours toward the point. Do this again and again, while slowly shrinking how far the neighbourhood influence spreads. #MachineLearning #ManifoldLearning #UnsupervisedLearning #NeuralMaps #GeometricML

We often hear that machine learning models "learn patterns in data". But what does that actually look like in geometry? If you dropped a little elastic mesh into a cloud of points and let it learn, how would it fold itself to match the shape of the data? In this scene we watch a self-organizing map...a simple unsupervised neural model...learn the shape of a two-dimensional dataset arranged in a spiral arm. On top of this, we lay down a square grid of neurons whose weights live in the same plane. At the start, this grid is just a flat net floating across the cloud...it knows nothing about the structure underneath. Learning is a repeated game: pick a random data point, find the neuron whose weight is closest, and then nudge that neuron and its neighbours toward the point. Do this again and again, while slowly shrinking how far the neighbourhood influence spreads. #MachineLearning #ManifoldLearning #UnsupervisedLearning #NeuralMaps #GeometricML

Mathelirium

139,588 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

We often hear that Machine Learning models learn patterns in data. But what does that actually look like in Geometry? If you dropped a little elastic mesh into a cloud of points and let it learn, how would it fold itself to match the shape of the data? In this scene we watch a Self-Organizing Map (SOM), a simple unsupervised neural model, learn the shape of a 3D datasets l, one static and the other dynamic. On top of this, we lay down a square grid of neurons whose weights live in the same plane. At the start, this grid is just a flat net floating across the cloud. It knows nothing about the structure underneath. Learning is a repeated game: Pick a random data point, find the neuron whose weight is closest, and then nudge that neuron and its neighbours toward the point. Do this again and again, while slowly shrinking how far the neighbourhood influence spreads. Python code is available for Subscribers. #MachineLearning #ManifoldLearning #UnsupervisedLearning #NeuralMaps #GeometricML

We often hear that Machine Learning models learn patterns in data. But what does that actually look like in Geometry? If you dropped a little elastic mesh into a cloud of points and let it learn, how would it fold itself to match the shape of the data? In this scene we watch a Self-Organizing Map (SOM), a simple unsupervised neural model, learn the shape of a 3D datasets l, one static and the other dynamic. On top of this, we lay down a square grid of neurons whose weights live in the same plane. At the start, this grid is just a flat net floating across the cloud. It knows nothing about the structure underneath. Learning is a repeated game: Pick a random data point, find the neuron whose weight is closest, and then nudge that neuron and its neighbours toward the point. Do this again and again, while slowly shrinking how far the neighbourhood influence spreads. Python code is available for Subscribers. #MachineLearning #ManifoldLearning #UnsupervisedLearning #NeuralMaps #GeometricML

Mathelirium

76,011 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

We often hear that Machine Learning models learn patterns in data. But what does that look like in geometry? Picture dropping an elastic mesh into a cloud of points and letting it adapt. How would it bend, stretch, and settle so it matches the shape hiding in the data? In this scene we watch a self-organizing map(SOM)...a classic unsupervised neural model...learn a 2D dataset arranged like a spiral arm. Over the points we place a square grid of neurons whose weights live in the same plane. At the start it’s just a flat net drifting across the cloud. No clue what the structure is. Fir the SOM, learning is a repeated game: Pick a random data point, find the neuron whose weight is closest, then nudge that neuron and its neighbours toward the point. Repeat, repeat, repeat...while gradually shrinking how wide the neighbourhood influence spreads. The result is satisfying...the grid stops being a grid and turns into a coordinate sheet wrapped onto the spiral. #MachineLearning #ManifoldLearning #UnsupervisedLearning #NeuralMaps #GeometricML #SelfOrganizingMap #Topology

We often hear that Machine Learning models learn patterns in data. But what does that look like in geometry? Picture dropping an elastic mesh into a cloud of points and letting it adapt. How would it bend, stretch, and settle so it matches the shape hiding in the data? In this scene we watch a self-organizing map(SOM)...a classic unsupervised neural model...learn a 2D dataset arranged like a spiral arm. Over the points we place a square grid of neurons whose weights live in the same plane. At the start it’s just a flat net drifting across the cloud. No clue what the structure is. Fir the SOM, learning is a repeated game: Pick a random data point, find the neuron whose weight is closest, then nudge that neuron and its neighbours toward the point. Repeat, repeat, repeat...while gradually shrinking how wide the neighbourhood influence spreads. The result is satisfying...the grid stops being a grid and turns into a coordinate sheet wrapped onto the spiral. #MachineLearning #ManifoldLearning #UnsupervisedLearning #NeuralMaps #GeometricML #SelfOrganizingMap #Topology

Mathelirium

23,021 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

The Trap in Every Mathematics Lecture If you’ve taken a lot of math courses, you start to recognize a pattern. There’s a moment where the lecturer is warming up with the obvious stuff...add matrices entrywise, scale by α, do the row-column product...and you’re thinking, alright… where is this going? Then you relax. You stop resisting. And right there, they slip in one line that changes how you see the whole subject. When Benedict Gross says "matrices represent linear operators,"he’s telling you to stop treating a matrix as a rectangle of numbers and start treating it as an action. A linear operator is a function T: Rⁿ → Rⁿ that respects two rules: T(u+v)=T(u)+T(v) and T(αu)=αT(u). Once you pick a basis, T is completely determined by where it sends the basis vectors e₁,…,eₙ. Put T(e₁),…,T(eₙ) into columns and you get a matrix A. That is what "A represents T" means...A is the coordinate portrait of the transformation. Now the punchline that makes matrix multiplication feel inevitable. If B represents S and A represents T, then doing S first and then T is the composition T∘S. In coordinates that becomes A(Bx)=(AB)x. So multiplying matrices is really composing transformations. That’s why multiplication is usually not commutative: T∘S is generally not the same transformation as S∘T, and the matrices inherit that noncommutativity. This explains half of Linear Algebra because it tells you what the course is really about...functions that move vectors around, not grids of numbers. A matrix is just the written form of that function once you choose coordinates. Then the rules stop feeling random Multiplying matrices means doing one move and then another, an inverse means you can undo the move, eigenvectors are directions that don’t get turned, and changing basis is just describing the same move in a different language. That one idea makes a lot of linear algebra click. #LinearAlgebra #Matrices #GroupTheory #GLn #MathLectures #Mathematics

The Trap in Every Mathematics Lecture If you’ve taken a lot of math courses, you start to recognize a pattern. There’s a moment where the lecturer is warming up with the obvious stuff...add matrices entrywise, scale by α, do the row-column product...and you’re thinking, alright… where is this going? Then you relax. You stop resisting. And right there, they slip in one line that changes how you see the whole subject. When Benedict Gross says "matrices represent linear operators,"he’s telling you to stop treating a matrix as a rectangle of numbers and start treating it as an action. A linear operator is a function T: Rⁿ → Rⁿ that respects two rules: T(u+v)=T(u)+T(v) and T(αu)=αT(u). Once you pick a basis, T is completely determined by where it sends the basis vectors e₁,…,eₙ. Put T(e₁),…,T(eₙ) into columns and you get a matrix A. That is what "A represents T" means...A is the coordinate portrait of the transformation. Now the punchline that makes matrix multiplication feel inevitable. If B represents S and A represents T, then doing S first and then T is the composition T∘S. In coordinates that becomes A(Bx)=(AB)x. So multiplying matrices is really composing transformations. That’s why multiplication is usually not commutative: T∘S is generally not the same transformation as S∘T, and the matrices inherit that noncommutativity. This explains half of Linear Algebra because it tells you what the course is really about...functions that move vectors around, not grids of numbers. A matrix is just the written form of that function once you choose coordinates. Then the rules stop feeling random Multiplying matrices means doing one move and then another, an inverse means you can undo the move, eigenvectors are directions that don’t get turned, and changing basis is just describing the same move in a different language. That one idea makes a lot of linear algebra click. #LinearAlgebra #Matrices #GroupTheory #GLn #MathLectures #Mathematics

Mathelirium

66,204 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

The Trap in Every Mathematics Lecture If you’ve taken enough math courses, you start noticing the same little move. The lecturer warms up with the obvious stuff, add matrices entrywise, scale by α, do the row-column product, and you’re thinking alright, where is this going. Then you relax. You stop resisting. And right there, they drop one line that quietly rewires the whole subject. When Benedict Gross says matrices represent linear operators, he’s telling you to stop treating a matrix as a rectangle of numbers and start treating it as an action. A linear operator is a function T: ℝⁿ → ℝⁿ that respects two rules: T(u+v) = T(u) + T(v) T(αu) = αT(u) Once you pick a basis, T is completely determined by where it sends the basis vectors e₁,…,eₙ. Put T(e₁),…,T(eₙ) into columns and you get a matrix A. That is what A represents T means. A is the coordinate portrait of the transformation. Now the punchline that makes matrix multiplication feel inevitable. If B represents S and A represents T, then doing S first and then T is the composition T∘S. In coordinates that becomes A(Bx) = (AB)x. So multiplying matrices is really composing transformations. That’s why multiplication is usually not commutative. T∘S is generally not the same transformation as S∘T, and the matrices inherit that noncommutativity. This explains half of linear algebra because it tells you what the course is really about: functions that move vectors around, not grids of numbers. A matrix is just the written form of that function once you choose coordinates. After that, the rules stop feeling random. Multiplying matrices means doing one move and then another. An inverse means you can undo the move. Eigenvectors are directions that don’t get turned. Changing basis is just describing the same move in a different language. One idea, and a lot of linear algebra suddenly clicks. #LinearAlgebra #Matrices #LinearMaps #Eigenvectors #ChangeOfBasis #Mathematics

The Trap in Every Mathematics Lecture If you’ve taken enough math courses, you start noticing the same little move. The lecturer warms up with the obvious stuff, add matrices entrywise, scale by α, do the row-column product, and you’re thinking alright, where is this going. Then you relax. You stop resisting. And right there, they drop one line that quietly rewires the whole subject. When Benedict Gross says matrices represent linear operators, he’s telling you to stop treating a matrix as a rectangle of numbers and start treating it as an action. A linear operator is a function T: ℝⁿ → ℝⁿ that respects two rules: T(u+v) = T(u) + T(v) T(αu) = αT(u) Once you pick a basis, T is completely determined by where it sends the basis vectors e₁,…,eₙ. Put T(e₁),…,T(eₙ) into columns and you get a matrix A. That is what A represents T means. A is the coordinate portrait of the transformation. Now the punchline that makes matrix multiplication feel inevitable. If B represents S and A represents T, then doing S first and then T is the composition T∘S. In coordinates that becomes A(Bx) = (AB)x. So multiplying matrices is really composing transformations. That’s why multiplication is usually not commutative. T∘S is generally not the same transformation as S∘T, and the matrices inherit that noncommutativity. This explains half of linear algebra because it tells you what the course is really about: functions that move vectors around, not grids of numbers. A matrix is just the written form of that function once you choose coordinates. After that, the rules stop feeling random. Multiplying matrices means doing one move and then another. An inverse means you can undo the move. Eigenvectors are directions that don’t get turned. Changing basis is just describing the same move in a different language. One idea, and a lot of linear algebra suddenly clicks. #LinearAlgebra #Matrices #LinearMaps #Eigenvectors #ChangeOfBasis #Mathematics

Mathelirium

133,454 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

In 1998, Japanese Mathematician, Engineer and Machine Learning pioneer Shun-ichi Amari published "Natural Gradient Works Efficiently in Learning (722 Cites in Papers and 9 Cites in Patents)" and made a point that still feels fresh even today If your loss is L(θ), then the usual update θ̇ = −∇ L(θ) quietly assumes your parameter space is flat. Amari asked what happens when the model itself has geometry, described by G(θ), the Fisher information. Then the more natural direction becomes θ̇ = −G(θ)⁻¹∇ L(θ). This is the same loss, but with a different notion of distance. As the animation shows, ordinary Gradient Descent follows the raw slope and gets dragged around by distortion, while the natural gradient moves in a way that respects the geometry of the statistical model itself.

In 1998, Japanese Mathematician, Engineer and Machine Learning pioneer Shun-ichi Amari published "Natural Gradient Works Efficiently in Learning (722 Cites in Papers and 9 Cites in Patents)" and made a point that still feels fresh even today If your loss is L(θ), then the usual update θ̇ = −∇ L(θ) quietly assumes your parameter space is flat. Amari asked what happens when the model itself has geometry, described by G(θ), the Fisher information. Then the more natural direction becomes θ̇ = −G(θ)⁻¹∇ L(θ). This is the same loss, but with a different notion of distance. As the animation shows, ordinary Gradient Descent follows the raw slope and gets dragged around by distortion, while the natural gradient moves in a way that respects the geometry of the statistical model itself.

Mathelirium

45,750 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

The goal isn't despair, it's indifference. It's enlightenment. It's having the ability to step in and out of the muck as you see fit without a handler or a sponsor coming down on you for it. I get fired up about things but this isn't my entire identity. I can put my phone down and walk away whenever I want and what a blessing that is.

The goal isn't despair, it's indifference. It's enlightenment. It's having the ability to step in and out of the muck as you see fit without a handler or a sponsor coming down on you for it. I get fired up about things but this isn't my entire identity. I can put my phone down and walk away whenever I want and what a blessing that is.

Shipwreck

20,795 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

String Theory is one of the few frameworks that tries to describe Quantum Physics and Gravity in the same mathematical language. In this animation, the glowing loop is the string, the shifting color along it represent its quantum vibration modes, and the surrounding fabric is a proxy for Spacetime responding. When you quantize a string, one of its vibration modes behaves like a graviton. So, geometry shows up as part of the same quantum system. #StringTheory #QuantumGravity #GeneralRelativity #QuantumPhysics #TheoreticalPhysics #PhysicsVisualization

String Theory is one of the few frameworks that tries to describe Quantum Physics and Gravity in the same mathematical language. In this animation, the glowing loop is the string, the shifting color along it represent its quantum vibration modes, and the surrounding fabric is a proxy for Spacetime responding. When you quantize a string, one of its vibration modes behaves like a graviton. So, geometry shows up as part of the same quantum system. #StringTheory #QuantumGravity #GeneralRelativity #QuantumPhysics #TheoreticalPhysics #PhysicsVisualization

Mathelirium

41,970 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

I don't want the Mormons to think we're picking on them, Jehovah's Witnesses are every bit as much of a cult as they are. What they both share in common is that they have a false occult 'Jesus' who is nothing like the Jesus of the Bible.

I don't want the Mormons to think we're picking on them, Jehovah's Witnesses are every bit as much of a cult as they are. What they both share in common is that they have a false occult 'Jesus' who is nothing like the Jesus of the Bible.

Now The End Begins

24,705 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Why String Theory Won't Die The string theory idea refuses to die because it's one of the few frameworks that forces a quantum object and spacetime geometry into the same picture. In the render, a closed string isn’t just a loop doing pretty vibrations. Its internal phase pattern is a quantum degree of freedom, shown as color. At the same time, its motion stirs ripples in the surrounding metric, shown as the fabric below. One object, two roles. A wave-like state living on the string, and a curvature-like response spreading through the background. You can literally watch quantum stuff and gravity stuff talk to each other in the same scene. #StringTheory #Physics #QuantumMechanics #GeneralRelativity #MathematicalPhysics #SciComm

Why String Theory Won't Die The string theory idea refuses to die because it's one of the few frameworks that forces a quantum object and spacetime geometry into the same picture. In the render, a closed string isn’t just a loop doing pretty vibrations. Its internal phase pattern is a quantum degree of freedom, shown as color. At the same time, its motion stirs ripples in the surrounding metric, shown as the fabric below. One object, two roles. A wave-like state living on the string, and a curvature-like response spreading through the background. You can literally watch quantum stuff and gravity stuff talk to each other in the same scene. #StringTheory #Physics #QuantumMechanics #GeneralRelativity #MathematicalPhysics #SciComm

Mathelirium

13,635 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Stealing Energy from a Rotating Black Hole A rotating black hole doesn’t just pull things in. It drags spacetime itself into motion. In the spinning region just outside the horizon, nothing can remain still in any normal sense. That strange rule opens a loophole. One incoming body can split, with one piece swallowed while the other escapes with more energy than it came in with. A Penrose-style heist where the difference is paid for by the black hole’s rotation. The same idea shows up in wave form. A coherent packet can skim that region and return brighter, as if the geometry itself acted like an amplifier. Split near the ergosphere and you can steal spin. Skim it as a wave and you can come back louder.

Stealing Energy from a Rotating Black Hole A rotating black hole doesn’t just pull things in. It drags spacetime itself into motion. In the spinning region just outside the horizon, nothing can remain still in any normal sense. That strange rule opens a loophole. One incoming body can split, with one piece swallowed while the other escapes with more energy than it came in with. A Penrose-style heist where the difference is paid for by the black hole’s rotation. The same idea shows up in wave form. A coherent packet can skim that region and return brighter, as if the geometry itself acted like an amplifier. Split near the ergosphere and you can steal spin. Skim it as a wave and you can come back louder.

Mathelirium

20,314 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

# FreeRTOS Kernel Teardown!! Working on porting the FreeRTOS kernel from scratch on a new target. Got the scheduler to kick off and switch between two tasks. It later runs into a crash... I am debugging that at the moment. I am going to dive into the details of the FreeRTOS Kernel implementation. The scheduler is a fancy version of what we hand coded as part of the "Cortex-M CPU - Programming a Round Robin Scheduler". It is available as youtube playlist - The FreeRTOS teardown and exploration will be included in the Firmware Engineering Bundle of courses: Use REBOOT50 at the checkout to get a 50% off.

# FreeRTOS Kernel Teardown!! Working on porting the FreeRTOS kernel from scratch on a new target. Got the scheduler to kick off and switch between two tasks. It later runs into a crash... I am debugging that at the moment. I am going to dive into the details of the FreeRTOS Kernel implementation. The scheduler is a fancy version of what we hand coded as part of the "Cortex-M CPU - Programming a Round Robin Scheduler". It is available as youtube playlist - The FreeRTOS teardown and exploration will be included in the Firmware Engineering Bundle of courses: Use REBOOT50 at the checkout to get a 50% off.

Piyush Itankar

14,420 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Christian Kirk explained the process of how he ended up signing with the #49ers this offseason: “I was in a position where I could be a little more picky on where I wanted to go at this point in my career. It just all depended on being in the right situation.……You know a lot of respect for that organization and the more I started thinking about it I’m like yes, that’s a great fit and you know I fit into that locker room really well and you know I want to be a part of what they’re doing.” Via: In Good Company with Mitch Morse

Christian Kirk explained the process of how he ended up signing with the #49ers this offseason: “I was in a position where I could be a little more picky on where I wanted to go at this point in my career. It just all depended on being in the right situation.……You know a lot of respect for that organization and the more I started thinking about it I’m like yes, that’s a great fit and you know I fit into that locker room really well and you know I want to be a part of what they’re doing.” Via: In Good Company with Mitch Morse

OurSF49ers

70,856 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Robert Benzie: "What Danielle Smith has done is open a can of worms to solve a problem within the United Conservative Party just as David Cameron opened a can of worms to solve a problem in the UK Conservative Party ... why would you ask a question at the risk of finding an answer that you don't want. I think it's just insane on many levels."

Robert Benzie: "What Danielle Smith has done is open a can of worms to solve a problem within the United Conservative Party just as David Cameron opened a can of worms to solve a problem in the UK Conservative Party ... why would you ask a question at the risk of finding an answer that you don't want. I think it's just insane on many levels."

Scott Robertson

40,497 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

this is a CATIA V5 extension called PYCATIA and it allows you to automate as well as create components in a purely data driven way, this is the direction that I would like to see more of from the people who want to make a professional tools for engineers in this extension you are still driving the inputs , however this is far less error prone when you have complex surface or tons of features that you have to change the fundamental problem with using pure LLM output to design mechanical components is it lacks the grounding in constraint-based parametric logic that real world CAD systems depend on. LLMs hallucinate geometry, they don’t model it. PYCATIA bridges that gap by letting you bind natural-language or data-driven inputs directly to CATIA’s kernel. this is the kind of tool that makes AI a actual engineers assistant not just spitting out STEP files that look plausible but building them from relationships references and real constraints. more tools should be built this way, coupled with existing industrial software, and building AI functionality on top of this

this is a CATIA V5 extension called PYCATIA and it allows you to automate as well as create components in a purely data driven way, this is the direction that I would like to see more of from the people who want to make a professional tools for engineers in this extension you are still driving the inputs , however this is far less error prone when you have complex surface or tons of features that you have to change the fundamental problem with using pure LLM output to design mechanical components is it lacks the grounding in constraint-based parametric logic that real world CAD systems depend on. LLMs hallucinate geometry, they don’t model it. PYCATIA bridges that gap by letting you bind natural-language or data-driven inputs directly to CATIA’s kernel. this is the kind of tool that makes AI a actual engineers assistant not just spitting out STEP files that look plausible but building them from relationships references and real constraints. more tools should be built this way, coupled with existing industrial software, and building AI functionality on top of this

Phoenix𝕏

11,243 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

There’s a random curve that is perfectly continuous in time, never jumps, models smooth noise in physics and finance… and yet with probability 1 it has no derivative at any point. If you zoom in anywhere, it never straightens out. Brownian motion started as a physics headache long before it became a clean mathematical object. In 1827, Robert Brown watched pollen grains jitter under a microscope and had no microscopic theory to blame; almost a century later, Einstein and Smoluchowski explained that jitter as the visible effect of countless molecular collisions, and then Wiener turned that physical picture into a precise random function of time that now underpins much of modern probability, physics, and quantitative finance. #BrownianMotion #ProbabilityTheory #StochasticCalculus #RandomWalks #MathematicalPhysics #QuantFinance

There’s a random curve that is perfectly continuous in time, never jumps, models smooth noise in physics and finance… and yet with probability 1 it has no derivative at any point. If you zoom in anywhere, it never straightens out. Brownian motion started as a physics headache long before it became a clean mathematical object. In 1827, Robert Brown watched pollen grains jitter under a microscope and had no microscopic theory to blame; almost a century later, Einstein and Smoluchowski explained that jitter as the visible effect of countless molecular collisions, and then Wiener turned that physical picture into a precise random function of time that now underpins much of modern probability, physics, and quantitative finance. #BrownianMotion #ProbabilityTheory #StochasticCalculus #RandomWalks #MathematicalPhysics #QuantFinance

Mathelirium

33,072 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Did you know that you can use GitHub Copilot in notebooks? Accept and run generated code with just a click. You can even attach variables from the Jupyter kernel in your requests ✨

Did you know that you can use GitHub Copilot in notebooks? Accept and run generated code with just a click. You can even attach variables from the Jupyter kernel in your requests ✨

Visual Studio Code

44,371 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Ask anyone who’s taken a course in Ordinary Differential Equations (ODEs) what a solution to an ODE represents geometrically, and most of them won’t have a clean answer. When I first took ordinary differential equations, the pattern was always the same. Early on it turns into a speedrun of methods: separation of variables, integrating factors, variation of parameters, Bernoulli, exact equations. Then pretty quickly the course slides into hammer-picking. Spot the form, apply the recipe, move on. Too mechanical! And the real problem is what you don’t walk away with. You leave with a toolkit, but without a feel for what a differential equation even is, especially geometrically. That matters because in real modeling the equations you meet are rarely nice enough to reward memorised recipes. So you get trained to solve toy forms, while the actual subject stays blurry. The behavior. The flow. The shape of solutions. It wasn't until I watched the first lecture of Professor Arthur Mattuck that I realized I didn’t actually know what a solution to a differential equation represents geometrically. His point is almost embarrassingly simple. A first-order ODE is a slope field, and a solution is a curve that stays tangent to that field everywhere. The math breakdown: Write the ODE as dy/dx = f(x,y). At each point (x,y), attach a tiny line segment with slope f(x,y). A function y = y₁(x) is a solution exactly when its graph follows those slopes. At every x, the slope of the curve equals the slope prescribed by the field at the point on the curve. That’s the one line that ties both viewpoints together: y₁′(x) = f(x, y₁(x)). So solving the ODE and drawing an integral curve are the same statement in two languages. Once you see that, you stop obsessing over whether you can write y(x) in closed form. You start asking the questions that actually matter. Where do solutions flow. Where do they get trapped. Where do they blow up. Where does existence or uniqueness fail because the field isn’t even defined? That’s the perspective shift I wish every ODE course forces early. It’s also why I keep pairing math with animation. #DifferentialEquations #ODEs #VectorFields #AppliedMathematics #Mathematics #

Ask anyone who’s taken a course in Ordinary Differential Equations (ODEs) what a solution to an ODE represents geometrically, and most of them won’t have a clean answer. When I first took ordinary differential equations, the pattern was always the same. Early on it turns into a speedrun of methods: separation of variables, integrating factors, variation of parameters, Bernoulli, exact equations. Then pretty quickly the course slides into hammer-picking. Spot the form, apply the recipe, move on. Too mechanical! And the real problem is what you don’t walk away with. You leave with a toolkit, but without a feel for what a differential equation even is, especially geometrically. That matters because in real modeling the equations you meet are rarely nice enough to reward memorised recipes. So you get trained to solve toy forms, while the actual subject stays blurry. The behavior. The flow. The shape of solutions. It wasn't until I watched the first lecture of Professor Arthur Mattuck that I realized I didn’t actually know what a solution to a differential equation represents geometrically. His point is almost embarrassingly simple. A first-order ODE is a slope field, and a solution is a curve that stays tangent to that field everywhere. The math breakdown: Write the ODE as dy/dx = f(x,y). At each point (x,y), attach a tiny line segment with slope f(x,y). A function y = y₁(x) is a solution exactly when its graph follows those slopes. At every x, the slope of the curve equals the slope prescribed by the field at the point on the curve. That’s the one line that ties both viewpoints together: y₁′(x) = f(x, y₁(x)). So solving the ODE and drawing an integral curve are the same statement in two languages. Once you see that, you stop obsessing over whether you can write y(x) in closed form. You start asking the questions that actually matter. Where do solutions flow. Where do they get trapped. Where do they blow up. Where does existence or uniqueness fail because the field isn’t even defined? That’s the perspective shift I wish every ODE course forces early. It’s also why I keep pairing math with animation. #DifferentialEquations #ODEs #VectorFields #AppliedMathematics #Mathematics #

Mathelirium

40,739 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

It's difficult for a team to become something its coach is not. “As a coach, you can’t just wear the sweatshirt, you have to sweat too. You got to do the work." -- Tara VanDerveer Culture is built through what a coach models just as much (if not more) than the messages they give. If you want a team that handles adversity, you show them what poise looks like. If you want a team that embraces feedback, you show them you’re actively learning and open to growth too. Culture doesn’t start with players. It starts with the leader. 📹: The Threshold Lab Podcast

It's difficult for a team to become something its coach is not. “As a coach, you can’t just wear the sweatshirt, you have to sweat too. You got to do the work." -- Tara VanDerveer Culture is built through what a coach models just as much (if not more) than the messages they give. If you want a team that handles adversity, you show them what poise looks like. If you want a team that embraces feedback, you show them you’re actively learning and open to growth too. Culture doesn’t start with players. It starts with the leader. 📹: The Threshold Lab Podcast

Zach Brandon

113,250 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten