TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Learn Difficult Concepts with the ADEPT Method

189 点作者 jhund将近 9 年前

13 条评论

saeranv将近 9 年前
When I was taking linear algebra and calculus in university, I found that there was a lot of focus on deriving formulas from underlying principles, with the notion that this constituted a &quot;fundamental&quot; understanding of the mathematic concept. I got quite good at being able to derive formulas for anything, and did well enough to scrape by on my exams. However the concepts didn&#x27;t really stick with me. Going through Khalid&#x27;s site I quickly discovered I had a terrible intuitive understanding of mathematical concepts, almost embarrassingly so. Somehow, derivation from first principles doesn&#x27;t quite capture intuitive insights for me, especially once I start worked at higher levels of abstraction removed from easily understood foundations (i.e. multi-dimensional vectors).<p>The two things that I found most helpful in relearning math is (1) building up a foundation for mathematical concepts through betterexplained&#x27;s intuitive method and (2) turning it into code as soon as possible. For the latter, I have a side project that is a sort of platform to test all my various ideas, from city performance modeling, to procedural form generation, where I am constantly trying to rework or tweak with new math formulas. It&#x27;s amazing how much more efficient and useful this is as a learning method.
评论 #12034697 未加载
评论 #12034222 未加载
评论 #12034351 未加载
theobon将近 9 年前
I&#x27;d love to seen an ADEPT method explanation of Laplace Transforms.<p>I got through most of math fairly easily by having a mental model of what was going on and could always check that I was on the right track as it made sense in my mental model. However, when I got to Laplace transforms I never figured out how to visual what that meant. Everything collapsed into transform into the magical space where you can do some things easier and then you can transform out into a new place. I could never be sure of how I got from a to b without a tedious examination of every step to ensure I applied the rules correctly.<p>I&#x27;d love to have a mental model for Laplace Transforms.<p>As a generalization, how does one explain things where no good mental model exists?
评论 #12034714 未加载
评论 #12033948 未加载
评论 #12034525 未加载
hodgesrm将近 9 年前
Great article! This is the most intuitive description of imaginary numbers I have ever read. I&#x27;m going to try the same technique with Software Defined Networking (SDN), which has been on my &quot;must figure it out&quot; list for a while. :)
karimdag将近 9 年前
Having skimmed the article I want to ask: How about the first principles method ? How does this [ADEPT] compare to it [fp] ?
评论 #12034235 未加载
vikeri将近 9 年前
Excellent! I always think that people, like myself, that work with somewhat abstract and&#x2F;or complex concepts need to improve our ability to explain them. Really happy to see a concrete method to do this.
copperx将近 9 年前
I see one thing missing from the ADEPT method, which is &quot;what&#x27;s the story?&quot; in the literal sense. Storytelling is one of the most powerful learning techniques and even a self-learner can create a story about the concept to be learned. The story doesn&#x27;t need to be picturesque; even a dry story is much more useful than just the facts and description.<p>Some of the examples they provide are stories (&quot;Academic progress on imaginary numbers took off only after the diagrams were made!&quot;), but the notion of teaching with a story isn&#x27;t made explicit in the steps of the method.
评论 #12038888 未加载
joelg236将近 9 年前
Fourier transformations clicked for me from your previous articles, this outline really shows the skill of &quot;sharpening&quot; rather than &quot;building&quot; knowledge. Helpful for young kids to adults alike.
评论 #12034528 未加载
wingerlang将近 9 年前
Cool. I am currently learning something new and something that have stuck with me is the &quot;if you can explain it, you know it&quot;. So while I am learning I am writing a set of instructions about what I am learning and some of what I have written down seems to resemble parts of this article.<p>Some analogy, visualisations and plain english.
kitd将近 9 年前
Interesting article.<p>I think I&#x27;m going to try explaining git branching&#x2F;merging to newcomers via interpretative dance in future.
kristianp将近 9 年前
Anyone want to explain the Y combinator with this method? I find the wikipedia article on it completely inscrutable.
supergirl将近 9 年前
Analogies are dangerous in math. They give you the illusion that you understand, but you actually don&#x27;t.
评论 #12038894 未加载
bbcbasic将近 9 年前
Hard to fully get the Haskell Monad with analogies. The way to understand them is to use them.<p>Coming to think of it same for OO. All those silly Dog is an Animal examples spring to mind.
评论 #12035256 未加载
zump将近 9 年前
Does anyone have a link that summarizes this new field of &quot;learning methods?&quot;<p>How does it compare to &quot;How to Solve It&quot;?