[Fall 2021 - MATH-338-001 - History & Philosophy of Math]: Concerns
expressed about the final examination
From: [Link]@[Link]
Date: Tue, Nov 30, 2021, 7:52 PM
Hello again,
Several of you have written to me directly to express your concern and anxiety about
the format and content of the Math 338 final examination. I thought that it would be
best to reply to the entire class.
I realize that the transition from the open-book online format used for the
assignments and the midterm and the closed-book in-person format of the final can
be a source of concern and anxiety for many students.
The format of the exam, which is meant to determine what you have actually retained
from the course, will not be changed. However, I would like to help the class by giving
out the following additional information on the questions appearing in the exam. This
information should be added to the information that I have already sent in a previous
message about the final examination, and should hopefully help alleviate some of
your concerns. I strongly encourage you to re-read my previous message before
reading the following:
Q1: This question will not be concerned with the anthyphaireisis (Euclidean algorithm
for magnitudes) since I already gave a similar question in one of the assignments. It
won't be concerned either with the proof of the Pythagorean Theorem. That takes
out a big chunk out of the limited set of topics from Euclid's contributions that I had
listed as possibilities for Q1.
Q2: Since the area of the parabola by Archimedes appeared already as a (bonus)
assignment question in addition to being covered in class, there is little point in
asking another question about the area of the parabola. You should easily be able to
draw conclusions about which area computed by Archimedes the question will be
about.
1/2
Q4: This will not be concerned with the computation of volumes of solids by
integration since Q2 is already an integration question. Likewise the solution of
cubics by intersecting conics was also an assignment question in addition to being
covered in class. You should thus be able to significantly narrow down the
possibilities on questions related to mathematics in the Islamic Civilization thanks to
this information.
Q5: Will not involve any contributions by Decartes. All that is left is therefore Fermat.
Q6: I already sent you an e-mail to say that Newton's computation of the curvature of
a plane curve by fluxions and fluents, which is the hardest part of the chapter on
Newton, will not be on the exam. Likewise, the proof of Leibniz's transmutation
theorem, which I will cover tomorrow and Friday, will not be on the exam. This is the
hardest part of the chapter on Leibniz. What remains from the contributions of
Newton and Leibniz that we covered in the course is significantly easier material. For
example, revisiting the examples of Newton's method of affected equations that I did
in class, or Leibniz's proof of the series expansion for pi/4, which I will do on Friday,
will be a very good way to prepare for the final.
A final remark: I realize that there is a significant difference between the reputation
that the course had built over the past decade as being a very easy course (I even
saw it being referred as a "bird course" on some forum) and what has been the
content of this year's course, which has been pitched at the normal level of a 300
level mathematics course at McGill. I therefore understand that as a result, many
students have had to spend a significant amount of time to keep up with the course. I
am both appreciative of and impressed with the efforts that have been put in by all of
you into this task. The very high grade averages on the assignments and the midterm
show that the efforts of the class have paid off.
Please rest assured that the purpose of the final is not to lower anyone's GPA, and
that the marking will be primarily emphasizing concepts.
Best wishes,
Niky Kamran.
2/2
