Okay, so yes, I learned that I actually didn't know anything about integrals, and that the fact that our problems were just tailored to our abilities, and that there are probably trillions of other functions I couldn't dream of attempting to solve, and that slope fields are almost like a deep, convoluted metaphor about the middle class American worldview, and that the wonder of infinite possibilities and endless numbers should instill in me a deep respect for the fact that mathematics is just as artistic as poetry and as much a study of existentialism as a class on Sophocles but NO MATTER, I have major beef with the little lines anyway.
(Yes, that was one sentence. that was sort of useless. This isn't Schoenborn's class, and I'd appreciate if you didn't tattle. I know you guys are tight.)
So my beef with slope fields. Although I understand how they provide a more general, all-encompassing way to solve integrals, I don't trust them. For one, slopes can be an infinite number of...numbers, and the whole thing is useless if you can't tell the difference between a slope of 3 and 6. They're practically vertical, for crying out loud. How accurate can the eyeballed graph be if slopes of 10 and 100000000000000000000000000000000000 look exactly the same?
I resent having to eyeball anything in a math class. As a english-y, social studies-y person, the redeeming factor of math is that it's precise. Mathematics is the sturdy shoulder of the mild-mannered guy friend you cry on when the passionate, temperamental musician breaks your heart. Okay, that metaphor was strange and unclear, but you get my point. I don't like to mess around with eyeballing.
Secondly, I don't like slope fields because even in the section that included the darn things, I didn't use them. In the other problems that didn't specifically require dot plots, I just used the specific kind of algebra we were taught. Full circle.
Maybe next week I'll make my peace with slope fields.
And write a blog that's not 90% weird complaining.
Mia
(Yes, that was one sentence. that was sort of useless. This isn't Schoenborn's class, and I'd appreciate if you didn't tattle. I know you guys are tight.)
So my beef with slope fields. Although I understand how they provide a more general, all-encompassing way to solve integrals, I don't trust them. For one, slopes can be an infinite number of...numbers, and the whole thing is useless if you can't tell the difference between a slope of 3 and 6. They're practically vertical, for crying out loud. How accurate can the eyeballed graph be if slopes of 10 and 100000000000000000000000000000000000 look exactly the same?
I resent having to eyeball anything in a math class. As a english-y, social studies-y person, the redeeming factor of math is that it's precise. Mathematics is the sturdy shoulder of the mild-mannered guy friend you cry on when the passionate, temperamental musician breaks your heart. Okay, that metaphor was strange and unclear, but you get my point. I don't like to mess around with eyeballing.
Secondly, I don't like slope fields because even in the section that included the darn things, I didn't use them. In the other problems that didn't specifically require dot plots, I just used the specific kind of algebra we were taught. Full circle.
Maybe next week I'll make my peace with slope fields.
And write a blog that's not 90% weird complaining.
Mia