Should I go back and start with a more "proof" based approach?I should go to a book like the one by Spivak which is entirely different from the book used for my course, and learn or in a way re-learn it the way it's presented in that book?Would a more proof based approach help me in this understanding? Will I always lack some aspect of understanding if I don't know how to prove these problems?To quote one of the comments on this question, the question can also be put"will studying calculus in a proof based manner help in understanding the techniques I've already learned"

Question

Should I go back and start with a more &quot;proof&quot; based approach?I should go to a book like the one by Spivak which is entirely different from the book used for my course, and learn or in a way re-learn it the way it&#039;s presented in that book?Would a more proof based approach help me in this understanding? Will I always lack some aspect of understanding if I don&#039;t know how to prove these problems?To quote one of the comments on this question, the question can also be put&quot;will studying calculus in a proof based manner help in understanding the techniques I&#039;ve already learned&quot;

retalibry9 · Accepted Answer

By learning a proof based version of the course, you will gain an understanding of how the mechanisms themselves work, rather than simply how to use them. It is the hope that once this is mastered, you will be able to develop new mechanisms for solving new problems - this is called research. It is very similar to knowing how to use a calculator versus knowing how to program a calculator.That being said, I recommend not putting off learning new things because you feel you don&#039;t have enough of a grasp of the old. This will typically stunt your development rather than help it. I believe you will find that in the process of learning new subjects, you will learn more about the old ones than you would have if only studying the old.

inurbandojoa · Accepted Answer

arithmetic in preferred and calculus particularly aren&#039;t about evidence. Calculus is the look at of the elements and houses and implications of instant rate of change of a characteristic with its variable(s). evidence is a major difficulty of mathematicians and is necessary to shield us from untruth kust as different specialties that guard us from risky meals and water and air and houses and streets and cars and planes etc. It is not clear what you mean by way of not know-how. i used to be informed that during defense of my grasp&#039;s thesis and i&#039;ve determined it to be a very worthwhile query.

"Should I go back and start with a more ""proof"" based approach? Would a more proof based approach help me in this understanding? Will I always lack some aspect of understanding if I don't know how to prove these problems?

Answered question

Answer & Explanation

New Questions in High school statistics