Dr-David-Banner 1,154 Report post Posted October 28 I've been running an experiment now for some time to see how far I can push my maths. First point of interest is I fit the autism type of impaired time/spatial navigation, motor issues and maths impairment (with far stronger linguistic ability). Anyway, to cut a long story short it seems I am now inventing useful mathematical formulae, one of which is almost unique. I'm sure it does exist but I guess the main point is I managed to work it out over many hours. It would take me 6 hours per day round about. Meantime the same maths problem I looked at on YouTube and found many of the approaches over-complicated and stuffed with formulae. So, I didn't bother with YouTube and worked by myself. Later I published the system on a forum where people seemed reluctant to divert from the commonly known methods (involving complex maths). What did I discover? Lots of things. Theory number one: Autistic people with difficulty doing maths can overcome the disadvantage to a point and, if so, the ability to see patterns as in linguistics can pass over to maths. This creates a strange mix of strengths and frustrations in maths. I mean I have to redraw a lot of diagrams to suit my perception. Also Asperger very much stressed the point autistic minds tend to be more able to do something different and I wanted to test that as well. 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites

Dr-David-Banner 1,154 Report post Posted October 28 I will add something more which is very important. "All" subjects are taught in a way to suit neurotypicals and especially maths. Neurotypicals have an advantage they do not suffer time/spatial impairment so can drive a car (I don't drive due to my co-ordination). Neurotypicals get support in groups and the teaching system is geared to those who listen well at lectures with no personal attention issues. Despite that, I am starting to suspect part of the problem for autistics is we don't respond well to certain methods of teaching. Personally I see no need to insert strings of code and symbols to represent theory that can be learned at face value. I also find there's a tendency for books not to explain sufficient detail and to be plain vague. I love that famous quote by Einstein where he stated you only understand a concept if you can explain it in a way a novice can follow every word with comprehension. Which leads to my final point: Physics students evidently approach maths differently to maths students. The physics students tend to be more direct, I'm told. Advanced maths per se is supposed to take 3 years just to get good at Algebra. 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites

Ben 3,449 Report post Posted October 28 (edited) Maths? Lol. 6x4 = "er, can't budge - maths is a human concept anyway, it's actually useless beyond the realms of planet earth" I'm not going to rule out that you're onto something though. You WILL eventually become what you think - I mean, if you think like an innovator or even an inventor , then you will eventually become one. If you want to carve out a slot for yourself then you probably will, so long as you're also standing from the outside looking in and being self-critical (sometimes you've just got to be, you really have.) Edited October 28 by Ben 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites

Aspergolfer 453 Report post Posted October 29 I'm absolutely HORRIBLE at math! I do well to keep my score correctly when I'm playing golf! 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites

Dr-David-Banner 1,154 Report post Posted October 29 The most interesting personal discovery is sleep can enhance thinking. If I spend 6 hours battling over a problem and finally go to bed, what happens is you go into a light sleep but your problem keeps churning around. Yet suddenly the problem is slowed down really slow and you think much clearer. That's how my maths idea came about. During all this time I got to thinking about Bruce Lee. I recall Bruce was stunned to see how Karate and Ju Jitsu were being taught in the USA with so much of it being long-winded and roundabout. Bruce often stated to take the most direct path. Reduce to the simplest form. So the Chinese martial arts Bruce reduced to something usable and direct. All those maths videos on.YouTube seemed to be very indirect and roundabout. Lots of jargon but far less understanding. 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites

Dr-David-Banner 1,154 Report post Posted October 29 This morning I woke up with a very simple visualisation of a hugely quoted theory. That of Georg Ohm. It became clear the theory of Ohms Law is really quite obvious. Today Ohm is quoted with reverence on all the forums I visit although at the time his theory faced opposition. It is really so basically simple if we just use a natural example. Imagine a river where the current is produced by wind. If we pretend the drive of the wind is constant over, say, an hour then the current of the river will also be constant. If at the end of the river there's a water wheel that turns steadily as the current pushes it, we end up with produced power. The power is if you think carefully the force of the wind times the current in the water. How do you know? Clearly if we halved the push factor of the wind we would get half the power across the water wheel. Applied to electrical law already we have voltage or push, then current (the flow) and watts (the power). We can then factor in resistance. Make the river narrower and less current = less power. All these theories usually started out a lot more basic but developed more over time. Today Ohms law can involve some detailed maths but the principle is still not so complex. 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites

Dr-David-Banner 1,154 Report post Posted November 8 (edited) Here, typical equations of the late 1950s. This would be used in the construction of a transmitter. Today I figure almost everything is being done by software - the maths can get more complex because it's software designed. Back then however, designers did the maths. So a typical student in 1960 would be doing this calculation. Edited November 8 by Dr-David-Banner 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites

Aspergolfer 453 Report post Posted November 8 My brain is melting now....... 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites

Dr-David-Banner 1,154 Report post Posted November 8 What's significant is I really do totally fit the maths impaired autism grouping. Inability to use maths dogged me for decades. The maths dyscalculia goes with dyspraxia. The root is time/spatial disorientation and poor mechanical, practical ability. Part of it is now an experiment. I was trying to specify what causes that numbness and fog you get with dyscalculia. Part of it may be verbal, visual and spatial. Verbally I don't understand "divide 2 by 4". I have to "divide two 'into' four. Now that makes total sense. Diagrams have been a nightmare. Any image that represents intervals, measures, degrees. These had to be redrawn. And a big big factor. Maths isn't explained in enough detail. My guess is with autism you need "all" the details to understand. Personally I lack intuition to generalise. If you are able to bring the maths up to reasonable standard, then the unorthodox thinking in autism can apply to maths as well as language. Maybe partly my dog helped me as I used to sit next to him and work through my maths problems. 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites

Ace 23 Report post Posted November 13 Since I have started on this forum, I have wondered how sever my Asperger's is. In lots of places I can relate, but in others I feel the complete opposite, like here. I am naturally awesome at math and physics but just eh in linguistics. I took 3 years of Spanish and I can only understand or speak vary basic Spanish if at all. Looking at that photo you posted, it looks very similar to stuff in my EE class I took for mechanical engineering a few years ago but I think the notation must be different as I am not entirely sure what Q means (maybe the frequency?). But this looks like part of AC circuit where another part would be driving the inductor. Of coarse in electrical engineering they probably do use some software to do a lot of the brunt work but for mechanicals they just want us to know how to do the basics by hand if we need to do a simple circuit. I mostly remember the DC stuff but I could probably dig up my notes to fully understand how these equations were derived. The only math I never really liked was stuff with matrices like linear algebra. It ends up just being busy work once you figure out what you need to calculate, especially with bigger matrices like 4x4s and up. 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites