Are there equivalents of this meme for other /sci/ fields?
>>7961858
First year math major here. I know everything all the way down to the integration vectors line, but then I also know what vector spaces, linear transformations, eigenvalues and eigenvectors are and I've done plenty of problems and proofs in linear algebra.
What is my level? Can I assume that I am smart enough to just intuitively get multivariable calc, triple integrals and everything between vectors and vector spaces in the graph?
I actually thought that linear algebra was harder than Calc 2, that is why I read a lin alg book first. Furthermore, all vector spaces are trivial, linear transformations were trivials and it only took me a few days of practice to actually get eigenvalues, vectors and spaces. Meanwhile I cannot even imagine what integration over more than one dimension even looks like.
What is even happening? Is math real?
>>7961874
>Is math real?
Unless it's complex.
>>7961858
>irrational pattern functions
>poly-dimensional topology
nice buzzwords
>>7961874
First year chemistry major and I'm already well into the serious math portion. You have to work harder, son.
>>7961878
Sick bantz m8
re-tweeted
>>7961858
>Reimann hypothesis
>Genius level
poly-dimensional topkeklogy for you my frondo
>>7961874
>I base how smart I am off of a picture posted on an Ethiopian carpet rating forum
Literally cancer
>>7961923
Linear algebra's technically harder but calculus is more difficult to wrap your head around at first.
>>7961923
You could be the best mathematician ever, but that doesn't make your opinion on what makes you "smart" or not true fact.
But to answer your question, calc II is harder, but linear algebra is just annoying desu
>>7961923
>someone who knows his shit did it
You could easily have made that chart by browsing through current math journal publications and cross-referencing it with questions from Quora like "What is the hardest problem in math" and "In what order do I learn math", both of which have been asked and probably have plenty of PhD's climbing over each other to get you the best answer they can. I am a college drop-out NEET that failed algebra in high school and even I know that chart was not made by "someone who knows his shit".
>>7961858
I googled around for a bit and there might be a physics one, but I have yet to find it.
Anyway, we definitely need more of these.
>>7961858
The area covered by "serious math" has nothing in it, does that mean there is no serious math?
>>7961858
Thing is, once you get past about Calc 3 / Differential Equations / Linear Algebra 2, math becomes more of a web than a direct progression. It's not that some problems are harder than others, it's that you pick a direction and go that way until it becomes hard. Some directions have had a lot of people pushing for a long time, so you have more to learn before you get to the cutting edge, other directions haven't. Some directions there is more "busy work" that produces new but mostly uninteresting results, other directions you get to really cool and difficult problems almost immediately. Mostly it depends on your personal preference of what you enjoy doing. For me that's algebra / logic, for one of my friends it's differential equations / applied calc, for another it's topology. Besides, some things that are hard for some people are obvious for others - e.g. algebra vs. geometry.
But this thing is nonsense. Math is mind-bendingly difficult in any direction.
>>7961858
>decrypting a one-time pad
wut?
>>7961858
>other /sci/ fields?
other science fields actually have productive stuff to do
Computer Science
Entry Level
>Java
>C
>C++
>C#
>Prolog
>Mongo
>Signal Processing
>Perl
>Scala
>PHP
>SQL
>Networking
>P = NP
>Architecture
>Ada
>Pascal
>Matlab
>R
>Quantum Computing
>Theory of Computation
>Bioinformatics
Genius Level
>Scratch
>>7961858
Nice, to see my meme is still being spread around on 4chan.
I made this back in 2013 just for fun and I still think I have the original .psd file somewhere.
>>7962898
The only way you might even attempt it is if the one-time pad wasn't truly random. Otherwise it's abso-fucking-lutely impossible.
>>7964138
gib or didn't make it
>>7964138
>my meme
>homotopy just above serious math
>algebraic geometry just above homotopy
>cohomology above algebraic geometry
>hodge conjecture above IUTT
>poly-dimensional topology anywhere above measure theory
>>7961858
Stokes theorem and divergence theorem are part of calc iii (multivariable)
How is radians above unit circle.
>>7961858
There is so much wrong with this, I feel like it was specifically made to be a troll image.
>>7961858
Add bio to everything and all is getting harder.
That's why biology is the queen of sciences : Physics is hard, biophysics is harder ; Math is hard, biomath is harder ; chemistry is hard, biochemistry is harder.
>>7964541
One example ?
>>7964545
It's more like a potentiator.
acetamenophen isn't a very strong painkiller, but combine it with oxycontin (percocet) and it's much stronger.
>>7961858
>order of operations below anything
>irrational numbers above variables
>matrices above complex numbers and logarithms
>"Stoke's Theorem"
>real analysis above crypto and game theory
>Boolean algebra that low
>P = NP above the other millenium problems
>millenium problems getting its own entry separate from each actual millenium problem
>>7961931
What!?!!
>>7964685
Intro level LA only teaches you baby's first matrices, triangle inequalities and complex spaces. LA is far more difficult and extensive than that, more so than calculus since the follow up to calculus topics are called something else.
>>7961858
When you're retarded and you're still in level counting
>>7964601
>millenium problems getting its own entry separate from each actual millenium problem
literally go back to kindergarten and learn the basics of discourse
>>7964132
>omitting Python
>>7964172
If it's generated by a computer then it's not truly random
>>7965330
Prove it.
>>7965370
modern computers (omitting quantum computers) all use deterministic algorithms to generate pseudo random numbers unless they use data from outside sources that is truly random, which most don't. Welcome to babby's first CS course.
>>7965330
>>7965370
Most pure software methods take in a seed number, and then perform a long string of computations on it until you get something that looks random enough. A random number generated by a computer is not "truly random" in the strictest sense, but there are algorithms out there that are designed to be as cryptographically secure as possible, such as Fortuna.
There are also RNGs that measure highly chaotic real-world phenomena, like radioactive decay, and generate a number based on it. I'm pretty sure they're as close to true random as you can get, but then the number isn't purely computer generated anymore.
>>7964485
Not that guy but I would like to take this opportunity to tell a story.
I used to live in an apartment building elsewhere in Minnesota, mostly older people but a few young'uns like me. One of the older women I shared the building with had a car - I'd seen her get in and out of it, more than once. The car had a minnesota vanity plate on it.
On the plate, it literally said, "MY MEME".
>>7965330
don't most operating systems have random number generators that can collect hardware noise information from drivers?
is that still pseudorandom?
>>7966512
Even the random.org thing with spaces radio waves or whatever the fuck is pseudo random.
You cannot generate truly random numbers algorithmically because then your algorithm is generating them.
You cannot generate truly random numbers from measuring some external object because then the state of the external object is generating them.
Randomness is purely theoretical.
>>7966550
>radioactive decay is not random
>this is what determinists actually believe
>>7964176
gib?
>>7961858
The funniest thing that I noticed about this was that eigenvalues and eigenvectors supposedly come after the entire field of partial differential equations, in which they are as ubiquitous as air.
>>7961874
No, because that includes tensors and PDEs.
I'm not saying it's beyond you, but you won't be able to just jump in guided entirely by intuition.
Especially since you say you can't even visualise the volume underneath a surface.
>>7964132
where is brainfuck
>>7967768
The use of eigenvalues and eigenvector go deeper than just PDE.
>>7967768
I agree. We studied eigenvalues/vectors in the first week of first year math degree. We didn't get to divergence theorem until second semester second year.
>>7961858
>PDE not serious math while Real Analysis somehow is
>Lie Algebras deeper than Algebraic Geometry
>Game theory in serious math
You're joking right?
>>7964744
Don't worry anon, learn basic math and you can start your accounting degree
>>7964545
Biomath is harder? Give me an example and I might consider, considering believing you.
>>7968609
If you're learning about eigenvalues and eigenvectors, you're not doing serious math I think the point is.
>>7965444
kekity checked
