Math, Science, and Economics, and Everything Else!

[Decagon]

I have a fairly quick question, I was wondering in the real world, if graphs ever go away. I wonder this because I'm currently in AP Economics, and so far, all it has been is graphs. I'm currently in Algebra 2, and besides the first week of review, all we've done is graphs. Graphs also seem to be relatively prevalent in most science classes as well (physics is almost exclusively graphs, chemistry has lots, biology has few). It seems no matter what class I take, there are graphs and nothing but graphs and my grades suffer because I'm very bad at graphs, especially drawing them. Does this EVER change?

I'm pretty sure this belongs in the off-topic forums, but I could be wrong, it might not even belong on this site.

[semaphore]

Graphs are useful representations of data in many fields. If it does ever go away, that won't be any time soon.

How else would you, say, visualise trends of unemployment figures?

[DEATHETERNAL]

No.
/10char

[Decagon]

Graphs are useful representations of data in many fields. If it does ever go away, that won't be any time soon.

How else would you, say, visualise trends of unemployment figures?

Why do we have to visualize? I don't understand why people require graphs and other visual representation to understand things.

[semaphore]

Why do we have to visualize? I don't understand why people require graphs and other visual representation to understand things.

Because in general, the human brain is hardwired to be able to process visual data more effectively. It may not be necessary per se, but it is very useful for most people.

I mean, think about it. Which is easier/faster for you to understand, a list of employment figures over 100 years, or just a graph? Sure you can read 100 numbers individually and deduce the trend from that, but it is a heck of a lot eaiser to take one glance at the graph.

[apepi]

Because in general, the human brain is hardwired to be able to process visual data more effectively. It may not be necessary per se, but it is very useful for most people.

I mean, think about it. Which is easier/faster for you to understand, a list of employment figures over 100 years, or just a graph? Sure you can read 100 numbers individually and deduce the trend from that, but it is a heck of a lot eaiser to take one glance at the graph.

I think this is sometimes a bad thing, it makes big numbers into smaller numbers, which might get treated differently than if it was bigger. So in essence
they get undervalued.

People do this all the time by just saying just about 1 million' people turn that into a million...just give me the real number!

[semaphore]

I think this is sometimes a bad thing, it makes big numbers into smaller numbers, which might get treated differently than if it was bigger. So in essence
they get undervalued.

People do this all the time by just saying just about 1 million' people turn that into a million...just give me the real number!

You can do that with any form of representation though.

[Decagon]

Because in general, the human brain is hardwired to be able to process visual data more effectively. It may not be necessary per se, but it is very useful for most people.

I mean, think about it. Which is easier/faster for you to understand, a list of employment figures over 100 years, or just a graph? Sure you can read 100 numbers individually and deduce the trend from that, but it is a heck of a lot eaiser to take one glance at the graph.

So is my inability to process graphs and other visual aids correctly is just a genetic mutation, and likely an inferior one at that?

[semaphore]

So is my inability to process graphs and other visual aids correctly is just a genetic mutation, and likely an inferior one at that?

It's not necessarily inferior, just different. That's assuming it is a biological though, perhaps you've just never learnt to read graphs properly?

[Nengal]

Graphs will never go away. Ever. They're incredibly useful for identifying trends and relaying data in an easy-to-understand format. Looking at a spreadsheet full of numbers doesn't do a lot of people much good when you can just take a quick look at a graph and identify trends very easily.

And once you start using graphs that utilize 3 dimensions... That's a lot easier to see than an equation of two variables with all sorts of terms.

Short answer: No. Learn to make them, use them, and love them. Graphs are your friend and they will never go away.

[dwarven]

Some people can see patterns in data more easily rather than seeing a visualization. Maybe that's how your brain works. It's not bad, and it would actually be a sign of higher intelligence.

[apepi]

You can do that with any form of representation though.

But the whole idea about them is to make it easier...

[Decagon]

It's not necessarily inferior, just different. That's assuming it is a biological though, perhaps you've just never learnt to read graphs properly?

Possibly, it may have been something that was learned during 5th grade, for which I absent nearly the entire time. I guess I should just get used to working with graphs, seeing as it will never go away regardless of the career I pursue.

[vindicatorx]

We don't use graphs in my logic based programming maths if that helps any.

[semaphore]

But the whole idea about them is to make it easier...

I don't understand what point you were making then.

[Decagon]

We don't use graphs in my logic based programming maths if that helps any.

/Cheer! This makes me happy.

[apepi]

I don't understand what point you were making then.

I said graphs undervalue numbers.
You said it could happen with any form of representation.
I say the main purpose of them is to make them easier, which devalues the numbers in recourse.
So it does happen in other representations but not as bad, such as an excel spreadsheet.
Like for instance the number 2456345/4912690 is just

[semaphore]

I said graphs undervalue numbers.

I don't need a recount of what you said; I'm saying I don't understand what you meant.

Like for instance the number 2456345/4912690 is just

That's a retarded way to use graphs.

[Beavis]

This thread makes me want /wrists. Graphs "devalue" numbers. Seriously? What does that even mean? I'm going with nothing.

[semaphore]

This thread makes me want /wrists. Graphs "devalue" numbers. Seriously? What does that even mean? I'm going with nothing.

I originally thought apepi meant people can use graphs to manipulate numbers... now I'm inclined to just agree with you =/