• View the 2024 QuantNet ranking of the Best UK Quant MSc Programs.

  • C++ Programming for Financial Engineering
    Highly recommended by thousands of MFE students. Covers essential C++ topics with applications to financial engineering. Learn more Join!
    Python for Finance with Intro to Data Science
    Gain practical understanding of Python to read, understand, and write professional Python code for your first day on the job. Learn more Join!
    An Intuition-Based Options Primer for FE
    Ideal for entry level positions interviews and graduate studies, specializing in options trading arbitrage and options valuation models. Learn more Join!

Problem-solving improvement

Daniel Duffy said:
Looking at research and research degrees in mathematics, it is clear that 90% is based on existing results. Most PhD students generalise and specialize existing research, yes? (unless you are John Von Neumann).
Click to expand...
Yeh, what are you trying to say?
 
Are you just stating a fact? I do agree with it

I feel that you are sharing knowledge first then planning to say something after about it.
 
Daniel Duffy said:
Looking at research and research degrees in mathematics, it is clear that 90% is based on existing results. Most PhD students generalise and specialize existing research, yes? (unless you are John Von Neumann).
Click to expand...

Unless you're Serre or Deligne. One of the things that used to irritate von Neumann about himself was that the truly seminal ideas didn't originate with him. But he was capable of taking those ideas and developing them very rapidly. This seems to have been the case with quantum mechanics, game theory, and weather forecasting.
 
bigbadwolf said:
Unless you're Serre or Deligne. One of the things that used to irritate von Neumann about himself was that the truly seminal ideas didn't originate with him. But he was capable of taking those ideas and developing them very rapidly. This seems to have been the case with quantum mechanics, game theory, and weather forecasting.
Click to expand...
Doesn't make him a bad person LOL

He was a terrible driver.

He made major contributions to a number of fields, including mathematics (foundations of mathematics, functional analysis, ergodic theory, geometry, topology, and numerical analysis), physics (quantum mechanics, hydrodynamics, and quantum statistical mechanics), economics (game theory), computing (Von Neumann architecture, linear programming, self-replicating machines, stochastic computing), and statistics.

Apart from that, he didn't do all that much really.
 
Jakelaker said:
Are you just stating a fact? I do agree with it

I feel that you are sharing knowledge first then planning to say something after about it.
Click to expand...
Here is a nice one
1. If it takes 5 machines 5 minutes to make 5 widgets, how long would it take 100 machines to make 100 widgets? _____ minutes

But I am interested in your steps in arriving at an answer ;)
 
Daniel Duffy said:
Here is a nice one
1. If it takes 5 machines 5 minutes to make 5 widgets, how long would it take 100 machines to make 100 widgets? _____ minutes

But I am interested in your steps in arriving at an answer ;)
Click to expand...
I had a go at this question as I was writing my comment that had the 9 marbles puzzle in it. So here is what I was thinking during that time:

Of course, obviously 100 minutes but I don't trust my mind. Then I noticed the simplification of 5-5-5 to 1-1-1 did not make sense since 1 machine, 1min makes 1 wedge means 5 machines, 1min makes 5 wedges. So the correct simplification of 5-5-5 is 1-5-1 as each machine starts and ends at the same time and no machine is off while others are working.

So ans is 5min.

___________________________

By the way, can you explain the purpose of your comment earlier?

This one:
"Looking at research and research degrees in mathematics, it is clear that 90% is based on existing results. Most PhD students generalise and specialize existing research, yes? (unless you are John Von Neumann)."
 
Jakelaker said:
I had a go at this question as I was writing my comment that had the 9 marbles puzzle in it. So here is what I was thinking during that time:

Of course, obviously 100 minutes but I don't trust my mind. Then I noticed the simplification of 5-5-5 to 1-1-1 did not make sense since 1 machine, 1min makes 1 wedge means 5 machines, 1min makes 5 wedges. So the correct simplification of 5-5-5 is 1-5-1 as each machine starts and ends at the same time and no machine is off while others are working.

So ans is 5min.

___________________________

By the way, can you explain the purpose of your comment earlier?

This one:
"Looking at research and research degrees in mathematics, it is clear that 90% is based on existing results. Most PhD students generalise and specialize existing research, yes? (unless you are John Von Neumann)."
Click to expand...

Most PhDs extend existing results, like e.g. Banach Fixed Point Theorem in a Hilbert space that generalizes algorithms for the reals.

And in many cases you work on a topic that is dear to your supervisor's heart :)
 
Daniel Duffy said:
Most PhDs extend existing results, like e.g. Banach Fixed Point Theorem in a Hilbert space that generalizes algorithms for the reals.
Click to expand...
So you were just sharing a fact, right?

I was confused because that comment came out of nowhere. I couldn't see a link between that comment and the previous comment.

Thanks for the advice.
 
A. 1 machine to make 5 widgets (==> 25 m)
B. 1 machine to make 100 = 5*20 widgets (==> 25*20 m)
C. 100 machines to make 5*20 widgets ==> 100 times faster that B (==> 25*20/100 == 5 m)

I take it step by step, one at a time and I can trace the step backwards and forwards. That's the way boring mathematicians like yours truly do it LOL

//
Now apply Polya's questions! QED

e.g.
what is input and output
getting from output back to input
Check every step

Write a small C program to test it.

//
I was confused because that comment came out of nowhere
It came from the archives:)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top