/edu/ - Education

>>2921

for you

-→ >>3074

I’m taking differential equations and my textbook is useless as fuck. is there an accessible alternative that has more example problems?

>>359
Do you happen to know any good courses online or whatever on discrete math? I found it pretty interesting but my professor was NOT GOOD at explaining the material and since COVID happened we kind of rushed through the class so I left feeling like I didn't entirely understand all of it

Can any mathsanon explain to me how to actually understand math? Because I just don't seem to master the tasks, that require you to truly understand the Essence of Maths. The only way I solve those Tasks, is when I look at the Solutions and this can't be the Point though, am I right?.

t.Fag who studies Chemical Engineering

>>4741
You do it every day and at some unknown point it just becomes an extension of your mind. The essence can only come from solving problems, usually with other people to get different perspectives, and creating a set of skills which you can call upon to solve problems.

I remember in middle school trying to desperately remember which axis is the x and the y, and how linear equations work. However these attempts are actually counterproductive IMO. At a certain points of maths you let go of trying to 'get' it, and just move on, then after solving future problems it may come to you.

>>4666
>why do orthodox Marxists want to eventually abolish money
here is a video about thermodynamics of money https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQrEEdy_uwM
summary of the video: money causes extreme inequality and it's deterministic.
>he just said it could be temporarily used in a workers’ state. I don’t understand how he planned on deprecating it afterwards.
people will work less and less because of higher and higher productivity, eventually every good will be too cheap to put a price on it.

It will not make sense to put a price tag on the earl grey tea that has just materialised from thin air in the replicator hole in the wall, because it only contains a few milliseconds of labour time, and any economic interaction would take you a few seconds to complete. Basically the time-cost of transactions would cost hundreds or thousands of times more than the products you get. It would be like going to a restaurant and ordering a cup of tea that cost 0.05 money for the tea but 100 money for the credit-card transaction.

>>4672
>>4671
I get that automation significantly reduces the labor time necessary to produce a commodity, but won’t a few job sectors like construction, resource extraction like mining, wholesale and retail distribution always add a significant number of hours of labor time per person to the commodity? some of these could theoretically take over 1000 years before they’re automated to the point of demanding nothing but seconds of time, am I wrong?

>>4673
>I get that automation significantly reduces the labor time necessary to produce a commodity
It's not only about the cost of a commodity. Transactions are not free, you have to spend time interacting with a transaction system like money tokens, credit cards and labour vouchers too. You have to spend mental energy to decide on purchases. At some point the hole of humanity would spend more time and effort on transactions than they work in the economy it self. It just becomes overhead.
>but won’t a few job sectors like construction, resource extraction like mining, wholesale and retail distribution always add a significant number of hours of labor time per person to the commodity?
I don't really know how the future looks like but replicators don't have much in terms of externalities, they need power, and maybe once in a while you need to refill the matter cartridge because it doesn't perfectly recycle. The replicator is just a projection of observable trends, like productivity improving, and shrinking of the size of production tools relative to the products they make, and it's the ultimate multi tool, because in principle it could do any modification you want. I don't really know what people will do, basically all the constrains we have today would be removed. If i want to make a prediction i'm left with few indicators, but there definitely is a lower cut-off point where prices make no sense to humans. And that's what i'm basing this on.

>>4673
Post-scarcity doesn't even imply 100% automation.

USSR was moneyless for all that maters. Money is power to command labour. USSR's currency didn't have any such power.

The Cover looks Badass ngl

>>4434
stop embarrassing yourself

>>4415
Bump

>>4472
he was spot on though

>>4434
lmfao

try nazi maoism
https://youtu.be/IjDy_uY2Iys

>>4113
Soo how it's going?

>>4113
>book about Pol Pot though
>will publish it on Kindle

Hahaha you absolute fucking Schizo. You have my blessings

How easy would it be going to uni in China? As a non-native, of course.

>>2544
In philosophy you can insert your pet issue into any paper if you try hard enough, like woman do with feminism lately.

>>4390
Where can I read more about this?

>>4534
If one knows Chinese and scores highly one can go to some good public STEM universities. Technically most people have done English classes in earlier but obviously that doesn't mean they can fluently speak the language. Getting to know the city before enrolling is a good idea too.

>>3540
Don't act too entryist, though, because orgs justifiably don't tolerate that activity.

>>3540
Also, unless they already are favorable to Marxism and Communism, it's probably better to start off with revolutionary works that are more relevant to the orgs' issues. Social justice is a part of any communist program, and it shouldn't be too hard to find material that's related.

>>4446
ideally i want this to dove tail into Vol 3, I also don't have the bandwidth to host another Vol 1 reading group unless someone wants to take that torch i dont mean to imply I'm doing really anything more than reading the chapters and participating in discussion

>>3770
I can't join. It says "no known servers"

Gee

>>4562
Whillikers!

This week we are reading chapters 11-14, and we will be dividing chapter 15 over the 2 weeks after.

This may change with holidays but the plan is to start Part 5 after the new year.

I'm not a student but I read shit like that occasionally. The author is not making up a private jargon. The language is utterly generic econ stuff. So I don't understand how you can fail to understand it. You can and should just look up the terms you don't understand.

Elasticity in economics means flexibility. If chocolate pudding varies a lot in price but I keep on buying the same physical amount month after month, then talking in Economese one would say that my demand for chocolate pudding is inelastic. Inelastic substitution between two things just means that having more of thing X does not help much with a lack of thing Y. (It's common in contemporary economics to not assume a general substitution rate like 5 X make up for 2 Y no matter how many units you have of each, rather it is usually assumed that the ability of the things to work as substitutes for each other gets worse the more you get away from the current proportions. This is not empirically derived, but based on the optimistic assumption that we are close to acting in a very sensible way about things like that.)

Constant returns means that when you are cooking something and you multiply the amount of each ingredient by the same number, the output of what you are cooking also gets multiplied by the same number. If at least one of your inputs cannot be varied like you'd want to, economists usually assume that you can't have constant returns. This is obvious in the cooking example if you really rigorously just follow one recipe with no alternative inputs allowed. Economists usually assume that you can do some substitution still, so you still have bigger output than before, but the growth is less than proportional to the inputs that you multiplied, since you didn't multiply everything. Again, the regular assumption is that prior to your attempt at changing the output quantity you had sensible proportions.

>>4638
>>4638
>The author is not making up a private jargon

I never said they were. I said that I needed help understanding it.

Thanks for the explanation.The problem with looking stuff up on google is that they rarely give a direct answer.

For understanding neoclassical economics - which in turn is necessary to learning contemporary heterodox economics, because so much of the jargon is shared - https://www.core-econ.org/ may be useful. It's free, designed for students, and by mainstream econ standards avoids a lot of ideological mystification.

>>4638
Sorry, I read your exaplantion, thanks for assisting, but I still can't wrap my head around this idea, I think I'm starting to get it…

> the elasticity of substitution between labor and land in the informal sector is smaller than the elasticity of substitution between labor and capital in the formal sector.

by saying the elasticity of substitution between labor and land is relatively low, does this mean that because land is relatively fixed, we cannot simply import many workers to match the productivity, because at a certain point, we need the land to work on?

And then on the other hand, in the formal sector, the elasticity of substitution between labour and capital is relatively higher, because you can substitute labour (i.e. people) for capital (and vice versa, i'm not sure if this is implied to go both ways or not??), and still maintain productivity? So are we saying that the formal sector is more equipped to deal with influxes of workers (or in Marxist terms, variable capital)?

>>4642
Yes. Where the author speaks of capital in the formal sector, he is thinking mostly of machinery and he is assuming that when the conditions of business change in the formal sector it's not that hard to change the mix of people and machinery to get something close to an optimal mix, unlike with land.

>>4300
>>4301
Sorry for the delay, thanks a lot for this material.

>>4299
Anki

>>4299
the best way to taech a kid a language is to speak it around them at home

>>4300
Thanks comrade. i am a esl kindergarten teacher and i really really need theory. My school has me essentially coming up with my own cirriculum.

Is there any resources you could point me to on education theory ideally around:
Montesori
Kindergarten and child development
english as a second language.

I am fucking drowning here so literally anything you can send me helps enormously

Also anything to do with cirriculum creation. I'm reading a book called "how we learn" which is pretty obvious what its about, but it's taught me about spacing and the study test study cycle and what spacing tests are best at retaining knowledge at.

My problem has been that i don't really know what areas of speech i should focus on. Should i teach them verbs and create stories around that that incorporates the target language? should i teach them common sentences? "how old are you? how are you?" etc I don't know if i'm actually teaching the kids anything. I mean i see them pick up some shit but i dunno mang.
sorry babbling. but yeah, i could really use some help

Get whatever tbh.

>>4631
Just learn German

>>4644
Not an anglo so learning german would be pretty hard for me.

>>4647
>Not an anglo
what's your native language then, anon? maybe if you tell us that we can give you recs based on your native lang and then you can look for those editions. I always prefer to read in my native language, even if I'm pretty confident in my english.

>>4649
Spanish.