With many mathematical formulas we have today, you have to understand the concepts so that you apply the correct one. You have to understand why your doing that and how you will benefit from that. I like to know why I'm applying a formula, wouldn't you?

 

Yes, in theory. But then again you might as well just say that you would like to know everything. In reality, knowing it tends to come at the cost of knowing something else and as far as math theory goes, it's one of the things where 90% of the effort goes into the last 10% of understanding. Knowing math theory (ie. taking a course in math proofs) really doesn't help you very much in practical matters. You might feel enlightened and good about yourself because you know the theory and the proofs that are the basis of the math solution you're working with, but when was the last time you actually needed it and used it?

Now knowing the proofs behind the math does not mean you don't know how to properly use the math. There's a difference between knowing the math, and knowing the theory behind the math.

__________________
Tanaka Sensei (avatar) says: Please spell it "ridiculous" correctly! Not "rediculous". ^^

 

You're right, I probably would like to know everything. Most things, anyway.

Well, I would say that knowing the theory is part of math.

 

I don't think so. A regular math class vs an honours math class go about teaching the same concept completely differently. One teaches how to use the concept, the other teaches where it came from. I really saw the difference when I was taking honours calculus and "regular" linear algebra at the same time. In the calculus class we were trying to figuring out how to derive everything, but not necessarily how to use it. Once we derived the result, we stopped. In linear algebra lots of algorithms were coming out of thin air to work with matrices, with no explanation as to why they were the way they were. You just used followed the algorithm to reduce the matrix or find the determinant or eigen values, but you learned to do it well and use the result for practical purposes. It was a similar thing with "regular" calculus II, you were told what Greene's THereom and Stoke's thereom was and how to use it. You were not taught why it is what it is.

Mathematicians are to engineers in math, what engineers are to technologists in engineering, or what scientists are to engineers in science. Of course there is overlap.

__________________
Tanaka Sensei (avatar) says: Please spell it "ridiculous" correctly! Not "rediculous". ^^

 

That was like my first year of uni. We took all kinds of math, linear algebra, calc I and calc II. It was only in second year where we started our basic electrical courses where we reviewed the calc I and calc II stuff to see HOW it applies. Because I can never truly understand why we learn some of these concepts, but then later on, I found out why we need them. Mind you, some of it was useless and abstract, but partial derivaties, laplace transforms and its inverse etc..proved to be very useful later on.

 

Hello again,


Knowing the math behind something like a circuit can be very very useful.
It can help a person get something similar to real life experience just from
running through a set of equations a few times. The math doesnt even
have to be perfect sometimes, just close enough to get a 'feel' for how
the circuit works and how it changes with component values so we know
about how it would work out in real life.

A good example where math pays off big might be this...

We need to select a resistor value that is to be used in series with a thermistor
so that we can use this simple circuit to measure temperature with an AD
converter, measuring the voltage at the junction. The question is, what
is the best value for this resistor? Many resistor values will work, because
we will always get a voltage out of the circuit, so the problem is to find the
best resistor value.
As it turns out, we can graph the temperature, AD converter value, and
resistance for this circuit to get a 'feel' for where this is going to take us.
But before we go there, try to take a guess for what this value would be.
If you already have experience with this circuit you might know the
answer already, or if you are a lucky guesser :-)
But what if we forgot what the best value was or we just want to prove what
it is? That's where the graph comes in.

See the attached picture.
In this picture we have temperature vs AD count vs resistor value.
We can see that for values of 10k and 100k we get an AD count that is
quite non linear. What this would mean is we would have to put up with
that or else work out the math for eliminating this in the micro controller
program, but looking again we can see parts of this surface that have a linear
character over most of the range of the AD converter count. Also, the
end application would only need a temperature range of about plus and minus
20 degrees for temperature fault detection (for example), so what would
the best resistor value be now, looking at the graph?
We can see that the part of the surface that curves less with change of AD count
is in the center of the resistor values, around 40k to 60k. Since these choices
give the best linearity, we choose 50k and this gives us very good linearity
even without any additional calculations that would have to be done by the uC.

Now we can see that we found the right value, and how did we get there?
We used math to graph the function and found the right value that way.
This took knowing the curve of the thermistor too.
What if we didnt have this math, what then?
Well, we would have to try a resistor value and then vary the temperature over the
required range and measure values, then plot the curve, then try another resistor
value, etc., untill we could find one that gave what looks like the best linearity.

Math, in this case, payed off big even though the math equations are not perfect
(the thermistor character varies a little from theoretical) but we were still able to
get enough 'experience' to find the right value. This graph took the place of
hours and hours of testing and retesting.

Attached Thumbnails

 

 

There are many things in applied electronics that either cannot be modelled, or become impossibly complex if you tried.

Simple things like grounding, and power supply decoupling, and unwanted interference picked up from external electromagnetic fields. Parasitic inductance and capacitance are often ignored in very high frequency circuits, with disastrous results.

Circuits designed by mathematicians, or developed only with computer circuit simulation software often completely fail to work in the real world.

While a circuit designer definitely needs to grasp the broader concepts, and understand the mathematics, there is FAR more to it than just that.

 

Hi All,

As someone who has only gone as far as first year college calculus, I think math is awesome! To me it is like a meditation that takes my mind off of real world problems while I am solving a long equation. And, for technicians, amateur radio people, etc, I think it's really important to at least have a grasp on trig and algebra to understand phase relationships and frequencies.

That said, I have spent too much time on theory and not enough time getting my hands dirty building circuits. I am currently studying for my 3rd ham radio license (amateur extra as it is called) and I've barely spent any time working on antennas, building circuits, fixing stuff, blah blah....I've spent lots of time reading books and doing problems but it is nothing like the real world....

All in all, I think both math and 'hands on' are important....

Annie

 

Greetings Annie,

I totally agree with your opinion.

Congratulations on obtaining you General Class License, and all the best when you take your Extra! Have you been on HF much? Or just VHF and UHF?

 

Hi Austin,

At the risk of having the thread go off topic, I got my general ticket in June but have yet to get on HF, lol. I have an Icom radio still in the box waiting for me to get an antenna rigged up. I recently moved from Tucson to Idaho and I've been spending all my time getting organized and setup in my new house....so, hopefully I'll be able to do some antenna study soon and get that HF radio fired up!

Annie

 

Hi there Annie,


It's so nice to meet a gal who likes electronics and related for a change :-)

Very good point about the phase relationships and trig, etc. That's
essential to understanding stability in the frequency domain. I dont see
how anyone could get by without that, or else working on very simple
circuits.
BTW, have any experience with power converters?

 

Are you sure about that? I used to think dknguyen was a lady. I was thinking, "Wow! There's an attractive lady on her, and she's smart!"

__________________
You don't need a quadraphonic Blaupunkt -- you need a curve
ball.

 

Hi again, guys,

Yes, MrAl, I love electronics AND math I actually joined this site a couple years ago but then got sidetracked playing music and studying math and have just recently jumped back in Sadly, I don't know anything about power converters....although back in the day my dad used to design A to D converters in silicon valley...but that doesn't count....

Annie

 

Nice to see you back again Annie, and congratulations on passing your RAE - I passed mine back in the 70's, but haven't been active for a number of years now.

Last time I was active, I used packet radio on 2m - then in a big gale my aerial blew down, the top half of the bracket ripped out of the wall, the pole and aerial blew over twisting the lower bracket, leaving the 12 foot pole with 2m/70cm co-linear sticking out horizontally

Still during the gale, I lowered a rope from the window in my attic, and got my ladders out, to tie it and make it safe, and eventually managed to lower it to the ground. It was a pretty hairy half hour or so

The pole is still in the garden, and the aerial is in the loft, along with the radio gear.

__________________
PIC programmer software, and PIC Tutorials at:
http://www.winpicprog.co.uk

 

HA HA HA! Ain't it the truth!

__________________
You don't need a quadraphonic Blaupunkt -- you need a curve
ball.