学习和重新学习你的领域

Terence Tao 2007-05-06

学习和重新学习你的领域

即使是相当优秀的学生,当他们得到问题的解并整洁地写下论证后,也会合上书本去寻找其他东西。这样做,他们就错过了工作中一个重要且富有启发性的阶段。……一位好老师应该理解并向学生强调这样的观点:没有任何问题是完全穷尽的。

教师首要的职责之一,就是不要给学生留下数学问题之间联系甚少、与其他事物毫无联系的印象。当我们回顾问题的解时,就有了一个自然的机会来研究问题的联系。

乔治·波利亚,《如何解题》

在这个行业中,学习永远不会真正停止,即使是在你选择的专业领域也是如此;例如,在我完成该主题的论文十多年后,我仍然在学习关于基本调和分析的令人惊讶的东西。

仅仅因为你知道了基本引理X的陈述和证明,你不应该认为这个引理是理所当然的;相反,你应该深入挖掘,直到你真正理解这个引理的全部内容:

  • 你能找到替代证明吗?
  • 如果你知道该引理的两个证明,你是否知道这些证明在多大程度上是等价的?它们是否以不同的方式推广?这些证明有什么共同的主题?这两个证明的其他相对优势和劣势是什么?
  • 你知道每个假设为什么是必要的吗?
  • 已知/猜想/启发式的推广有哪些?
  • 是否有更弱更简单的版本可以满足某些应用?
  • 有哪些模型示例展示了该引理的作用?
  • 什么时候使用该引理是个好主意,什么时候不是?
  • 它能解决什么样的问题,什么样的问题超出了它的能力范围?
  • 该引理在数学的其他领域是否有类似物?
  • 该引理是否适合更广泛的范式或计划?

对你的领域进行讲座,或撰写讲义或其他说明性材料是特别有用的,即使只是供个人使用。你最终将能够使用高效的心理简写来内化甚至非常困难的结果;这不仅让你能够轻松地使用这些结果,并提高你在该领域的能力,而且还释放了心理空间来学习更多材料。

了解自己领域的另一个有用方法是,选取该领域的一篇关键论文,并对该论文进行引文搜索(即搜索引用该关键论文的其他论文)。如今有许多工具可以进行引文搜索;例如,MathSciNet 提供此功能,甚至通用网络搜索引擎通常也能给出以前可能不知道的有用”命中”。

另见”问自己愚蠢的问题”。

Learn and relearn your field

Even fairly good students, when they have obtained the solution of the problem and written down neatly the argument, shut their books and look for something else. Doing so, they miss an important and instructive phase of the work. … A good teacher should understand and impress on his students the view that no problem whatever is completely exhausted.

One of the first and foremost duties of the teacher is not to give his students the impression that mathematical problems have little connection with each other, and no connection at all with anything else. We have a natural opportunity to investigate the connections of a problem when looking back at its solution.

George Pólya, “How to Solve It”

Learning never really stops in this business, even in your chosen specialty; for instance I am still learning surprising things about basic harmonic analysis, more than ten years after writing my thesis in the topic.

Just because you know a statement and proof of Fundamental Lemma X, you shouldn’t take that lemma for granted; instead, you should dig deeper until you really understand what the lemma is all about:

  • Can you find alternate proofs?
  • If you know two proofs of the lemma, do you know to what extent the proofs are equivalent? Do they generalise in different ways? What themes do the proofs have in common? What are the other relative strengths and weaknesses of the two proofs?
  • Do you know why each of the hypotheses are necessary?
  • What kind of generalizations are known/conjectured/heuristic?
  • Are there weaker and simpler versions which can suffice for some applications?
  • What are some model examples demonstrating that lemma in action?
  • When is it a good idea to use the lemma, and when isn’t it?
  • What kind of problems can it solve, and what kind of problems are beyond its ability to assist with?
  • Are there analogues of that lemma in other areas of mathematics?
  • Does the lemma fit into a wider paradigm or program?

It is particularly useful to lecture on your field, or write lecture notes or other expository material, even if it is just for your own personal use. You will eventually be able to internalise even very difficult results using efficient mental shorthand; this not only allows you to use these results effortlessly, and improve your own ability in the field, but also frees up mental space to learn even more material.

Another useful way to learn more about one’s field is to take a key paper in that field, and perform a citation search on that paper (i.e. search for other papers that cite the key paper). There are many tools for citation searches nowadays; for instance, MathSciNet offers this functionality, and even a general-purpose web search engine can often give useful “hits” that one might not have previously been aware of.

See also “ask yourself dumb questions”.