3 ms·
He's not making it sound magical. He's pointing out how hard it is.
by maroonblazer 5y ago
He's not making it sound magical. He's pointing out how hard it is.
- taeric 5y agoI think I was just sticking on the gp's "In my mind STEM topics exist on a scale that has math at one end..." Especially with the first supporting evidence being that order matters on how you mix things. Only in very elementary math, it seems, is that not the case. Yet, we stick on that heavily. That is, I wasn't trying to counter the point. I intend my point to be a further exploration on why that makes things feel more complicated. Near mystical, in that we can't always explain why an order is important. Sometimes we can, of course.
- DiggyJohnson 5y agoI track your point, though I might add that in advanced mathematics, things can often be reasoned in multiple directions, or sometimes proved via multiple methods. Often things are demonstrated irrespective of changing parameters, or otherwise the parameters are well understood to define the problem. This isn't true for many orgo chemicals, based on the OP. The scale of sensitivity to initial and intermediate (!) conditions is un-intuitively high.
- taeric 5y agoMakes sense. I think it is from a definition perspective, though. Statically, it is easy to define things independent of the process that governs them. Such that it is a middle college class that really covers dynamic systems for structural analysis. With most earlier classes being static analysis. Even electrical classes started on analog circuits and power transmission later in courses. Early circuits are centered around ready dc connections. Or steady state ac ones.