What is your field/career?

[darrelljs]

You guys jinxed us, Yellowstone is going to pop for sure now .

Darrell

[Coeurva]

In the case of the math problems, I think it just comes down to lack of previous knowledge/experience (I hope, at least).

Given infinite time and motivation, could anyone learn anything? I believe that there's a gap I'll never bridge to the best of them, in whatever subject.

About my writing, is there an e-mail I could send them to? I'd be very grateful if you try to read them.

Yes, I'll have sent you a PM within five minutes

By the way, was there a special reason that you learnt portuguese? It's pretty uncommon.

I wanted to read Camões in the original, and another reason that's not too interesting to talk about

Finally, about maths again, I want to ask some advice from you guys. If I am to start a programming course, what are the subjects you would recommend I start studying to prepare a bit for it?

In descending order of importance, repeat high-school stuff:
- Transforming any given expression into a form more suitable to the task at hand (this is essentially half of mathematics )
- Systems of linear equations (prepares you for a first taste of why matrices are wonderful tools, not least for the programmer; fun fact: I never learnt Gauss' algorithm in grammar school; the approach taught was basically "brute-force it till it fits", i.e. wizardry -- even though Gauss should be much less confusing to students)
- Real analysis (specifically, learn the rules of differentiation and integration, and the derivatives/anti-derivatives of elementary functions)
- Analytic geometry (prepares you for linear algebra by showing one specific concrete application) E.g. what's the area of a parallelogram whose sides are described by (a1, a2) and (b1, b2)?

abs(a1b2 - a2b1). While the more interesting question is why that is it really helps to know these things in your sleep. I think half my errors in maths exams can be traced to "I know there's an algorithm / a closed formula, but I don't remember it and don't have time to work it out, because it's an exam", along with how awfully slow I am generally.

Then (first two semesters):
- Linear algebra
- Real analysis
- Algebraic structures (semigroups, monoids, groups, rings, fields)

Then:
- Differential equations
- Stochastics
- Complex analysis

This is only based off my own syllabus / experiences. After that, you might get to stuff like systems theory

Considering this, I like the "logical" (not sure if that makes sense) part of programming more than anything else

"Structural"? "Algorithmic"?

I'd recommend looking into Project Euler, but it assumes basic knowledge of one programming language of your choice (it's also a good way to improve your proficiency in another one later).

EDIT: Inadvertently echoed Dark Savant.

[Ruff_Hi]

You certainly cannot take a series of large eruptions at different volcanoes and draw any sort of conclusion that we're "overdue for a big one" because the connectivity between those volcanoes erupting is vanishingly small. You can look at an individual volcano - e.g. Vesuvius, Mount St. Helens, Monserrat - analyse previous eruption histories and other factors including the type of volcano, and come to a guess at when it might next erupt. However the standard deviation on those can be very large and operate on a Geologic timescale, and believe me no-one is very good at thinking on a Geologic timescale.

Maybe the most famous (in the US, at least) "we are overdue" is the Yellowstone Caldera, which has experienced major eruptions 2.1 million, 1.3 million, and 630,000 years ago. Now you can say "it is due" for another eruption, but not with any accuracy on a human timescale.

Another thing "we are overdue" for on a Geologic timescale is a flipping of the Earth's magnetic field. In recent times (say past 5 Million years) this has averaged every 450,000 years and we are 780,000 years from the last one. However the duration over that time period has ranged from 1 Million down to the 440yrs of the Laschamp Event. And then there's the Cretaceous Normal which evidence suggests lasted a full 40 Million years.

So yeah, Geologic Timescale.

This is all lies. The earth is only 6000 yrs old and it is flat to boot.

[Dreylin]

You certainly cannot take a series of large eruptions at different volcanoes and draw any sort of conclusion that we're "overdue for a big one" because the connectivity between those volcanoes erupting is vanishingly small. You can look at an individual volcano - e.g. Vesuvius, Mount St. Helens, Monserrat - analyse previous eruption histories and other factors including the type of volcano, and come to a guess at when it might next erupt. However the standard deviation on those can be very large and operate on a Geologic timescale, and believe me no-one is very good at thinking on a Geologic timescale.

Maybe the most famous (in the US, at least) "we are overdue" is the Yellowstone Caldera, which has experienced major eruptions 2.1 million, 1.3 million, and 630,000 years ago. Now you can say "it is due" for another eruption, but not with any accuracy on a human timescale.

Another thing "we are overdue" for on a Geologic timescale is a flipping of the Earth's magnetic field. In recent times (say past 5 Million years) this has averaged every 450,000 years and we are 780,000 years from the last one. However the duration over that time period has ranged from 1 Million down to the 440yrs of the Laschamp Event. And then there's the Cretaceous Normal which evidence suggests lasted a full 40 Million years.

So yeah, Geologic Timescale.

This is all lies.  The earth is only 6000 yrs old and it is flat to boot.

Also ending on 23rd September sometime in October!

[Dark Savant]

You certainly cannot take a series of large eruptions at different volcanoes and draw any sort of conclusion that we're "overdue for a big one" because the connectivity between those volcanoes erupting is vanishingly small. You can look at an individual volcano - e.g. Vesuvius, Mount St. Helens, Monserrat - analyse previous eruption histories and other factors including the type of volcano, and come to a guess at when it might next erupt. However the standard deviation on those can be very large and operate on a Geologic timescale, and believe me no-one is very good at thinking on a Geologic timescale.

Oh, I didn't mean to imply those were in any way causally related; what I meant is "these apparently happen more often than what modern society is accustomed to".

Except ... if that were the case, there should exist more "the world is screwed" eruptions between Baekdu blowing up in 946, Rinjani blowing up in 1257, and Huaynaputina blowing up in 1600.  Apart from that, I'm not sure, and would scientists/historians necessarily even know?  I'm thinking there may have been more than Rinjani to kick off the Little Ice Age (assuming there's a connection there at all -- I don't know), and now I'm idly wondering if the Little Ice Age ended in part because volcanoes stopped blowing up as often.  As you can probably tell, this is getting way beyond my payscale.

(For those of you who don't know: the Little Ice Age was a period of global cooling from about the late 1200s to about the early 1800s.  It caused a lot of food crises -- especially in the 1300s; there were an unusual number of famines in Europe in that century.  Oh, that century also featured the Black Death and the breakout of the Hundred Years' War.  Not a fun time to be alive in Europe.)

So yeah, Geologic Timescale.

I get the impression that anything overdue in a geological timescale isn't that big a deal, because most are still unlikely to hit in a timeframe less than that of, say, how long writing has existed (~5000 years), which is still short geologically.

As for warnings; sure there are often (but not always) warning signs, but these are also often subtle and can extend over such a period as to breed complacency: you'll end up in a "Geologist who cried Volcano!" situation more often than not. And besides, it's not like it's going to stop humanity settling these areas, or even adequately preparing for the risks. California is still woefully unprepared to deal with an Earthquake. Hurricanes still cause widespread devastation in the Caribbean & Southern US even with good advanced warnings....

Well, the Caribbean is extra screwed from a combination of poverty, and being vulnerable to both earthquakes and hurricanes (it's hard even with wealth to protect against both at the same time -- Japan has about the same problem too ).

I don't think "geologist who cried volcano" is a problem, is it?  The Philippines mass evacuated in 1991 for Pinatubo very successfully in response to the warnings of geologists -- that was almost Krakatoa-sized, but killed <1000.  Nevado del Ruiz killed >20,000 in 1985, and was only lethal because the Colombian government screwed up by ignoring geologists, and that's widely believed in Colombia.  And Mt. St Helens in 1980 is also pretty well known for killing people who ignored warnings, enough to have some penetrance in popular culture here.  (RIP, other Harry Truman.)

And I get the impression the real huge potential catastrophes are the ones that aren't expected at all -- the obvious example is the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake/tsunami.  Other possibilities include:

• We haven't been hit by a serious solar flare since 1859.  One hitting the Earth would cause a serious catastrophe; that would screw around with modern technology something fierce.
  
• Los Angeles can actually be hit by a hurricane -- southern California got hit by a large one in 1858.  That would be incredibly nasty since they're instead prepared for an earthquake.
  
• Boston is vulnerable to a good-sized earthquake, and some think it's overdue.  It probably wouldn't be more than magnitude ~6.5; that may cause no deaths at all where I live, but in Boston quite possibly thousands -- it has a lot of brick buildings.
  

[Mardoc]

Make sure you have mastered basic calculus (single-variable differential and integral).

Huh, really?  In my programming for engineers courses (admittedly pretty basic) we didn't get to anything that looked remotely like a continuous function.  Seemed to me that algebra would have been sufficient (although probability and stats sound useful).

Or is calculus more needed for the reasoning about programs and algorithmic speed and that sort of thing?  Not the programming but the computer science, in other words?

I do agree with the recommendation to start practicing programming.  Nothing teaches you the difference between what you told the computer to do and what you meant the computer to do quite like actually doing it.

[Dark Savant]

Make sure you have mastered basic calculus (single-variable differential and integral).

Huh, really?  In my programming for engineers courses (admittedly pretty basic) we didn't get to anything that looked remotely like a continuous function.  Seemed to me that algebra would have been sufficient (although probability and stats sound useful).

Or is calculus more needed for the reasoning about programs and algorithmic speed and that sort of thing?  Not the programming but the computer science, in other words?

I did need the calculus for proofs in algorithms classes, which required it as a prerequisite.

[Ichabod]

Thanks for the advice, everyone.

I really liked that HackerRank site. My programming knowledge is very basic, I only did some JavaScript courses in another site called Code Academy. I know the basics of loops, functions, variables, using JS syntax (though I forget the exact meaning some of the time - I spent a lot of time not figuring out what was wrong with my solution, before realizing || is not &&). But I really love the learn through problem solving approach and that site gives some awesome problems (I'm doing the newbie ones, but they are very interesting still). 

Without going that much further, I already see why knowing a language is a vital part to begin. It's very annoying to want to do something, but not know how. For example, how do I mention a specific part of the input given? I know what part I want to refer to, I know what I want to do with it, but I can't do it. It's very frustrating when that happens.


I'll keep pestering you guys for help, perhaps opening a new thread, to not clutter this one.

[Woden]

Here are some questions:

1) What degrees and diplomas do you have?
2) Is there anything of note you specialized in during your education?
3) What is your current job and/or your career?
4) Is there anything of note you specialize in at your job?
5) Are there any past jobs you've done that are of interest?
6) What is your name, address, and credit card PIN?

1) BS and MS in Civil Engineering and 2 or 3 publications away from a PhD.
2) Water Resources, graduate work focused/focuses on hydro-statistics and wavelet analysis (by no means an expert, just used them a lot).
3) Engineer for a mid-size consulting firm in the Upper Midwest.
4) Not much, I guess having my background with statistics, the more "data analysis" type work usually end up on my desk. 
5) Odin, Asgard, and I forgot.

[TheHumanHydra]

You've probably heard of Krakatoa blowing in 1883, which killed tens of thousands of people, but didn't cause worldwide crop failures.  Some eruptions of the "oh god crop failures" kind happened in 1600 (Huaynaputina), 1783 (Laki), and 1815 (Tambora).  The first one contributed to the Time of Troubles in Russia; the second the French Revolution.  The second and third also drove US expansion westward -- a lot of people stopped farming marginal land then and moved west.  1816 was a terrible year, but it's hardly remembered now.

Thanks. I've dealt very little with macro history, so I was unaware of all this (excepting the name 'Krakatoa').

Ichabod, feel free to clutter this thread as much as you'd like (but also to start a new one if you'd like more concentrated advice). This thread was made for tangents.