6

What level of algebraic manipulations are needed for real analysis and higher math, and how should one attain it?

I'm able to solve most proofs in typical Real Analysis textbooks or university exams. Yet, despite that, when presented with a challenging, but elementary, algebraic manipulation (i.e. the kind seen on olympiads), I sometimes struggle.

Take, for example, some of the problems on this AoPS Intermediate Algebra Test, such as:

  • Find all solutions (real and complex) to $\sqrt{x − 5} + \sqrt{x + 15} = 10$
  • and to $\sqrt[3]{x^2 - 1} + \frac {20}{\sqrt[3]{x^2 - 1}} = 12$
  • Simplify $\sqrt[4]{161 − 72\sqrt 5}$

or this one from Gelfand's Algebra:

I find these and similar problems quite challenging.

Should I go back and build up these elementary algebraic manipulation skills before proceeding further with higher math? If so, how? When and how did you built these skills?


In the spirit of math.SE, I'll share my "work" on this question so far:

  1. It would seem yes, go back and build these foundations before proceeding, because you need the foundations before building.
  2. But: The fact that you're able to succeed at math well beyond that raises doubts if these really are foundations, or more contest style challenges.
  3. These algebraic manipulations, beyond the very basics, don't seem to be covered in any standard text, at any level, except for contest math. High school algebra and precalculus texts do not teach the advanced manipulations needed to solve problems like the above. And university level analysis, linear algebra, abstract algebra start after them.
  4. All of which suggests that this level of manipulation is primarily part of contest math, but not generally a foundation or component of "standard" math. It's well established the difference: contest math revolves around "tricks," usually to remove deliberate obfuscation; standard math revolves around underlying concepts and techniques which expose a unity and clarity
  5. Support for the above: When looking for resources on problems like the above, the results are almost entirely contest math sites (even the names, like "Simon's Favorite Factoring Trick," are from contest math).
  6. Still: Eventually, students of "standard" math need to be able to use the techniques, eventually. There have been problems, such as What is the locus of points in the plane $\{v : v \cdot (v-a) = 0\}$ for fixed $a$? or simplfying $xy−bx−ay−ab=0$, where I get stuck on the manipulations. Do they just pick them up somehow? Do they become obvious once you've learn enough e.g. analysis and algebra? Update: Another example of where this came up in analysis is How to solve a particular system of non-linear multivariate equations?

To fill this gap, I invested some effort in going through books and resources on algebraic manipulations for contest math, and while I found it helpful, it certainly doesn't provide the satisfaction or insight as e.g. proving problems in analysis. So I'm confused whether I should return to analysis or continue working these manipulations, and, if I do, when and how can I pick these manipulations up? When and how have others done so?

SRobertJames
  • 4,278
  • 1
  • 11
  • 27
  • 4
    I'm almost 30 and have not used "contest math" strategies for any of my higher math classes. For a standard analysis course, this is overboard. – Sean Roberson Jun 28 '23 at 14:47
  • 1
  • My take on #6... You "pick them up" by practicing, solving enough problems until some patterns become apparent. That will serve you well not necessarily for contest math, but in everyday math where missing on simpler steps can impede progress towards the bigger results. FWIW the problems at the top are all about recognizing patterns - first one reduces to a linear equation after squaring twice, second one is a disguised quadratic, third one is denesting square roots twice, last one is a homogeneous symmetric expression which can be written in terms of the elementary symmetric polynomials. – dxiv Jun 29 '23 at 01:08
  • @dxiv If they're important, wouldn't it be more effective to learn them in an organized fashion, with a proper context? E.g. you can learn derivatives and integrals by picking up "here's how we figure out derivative of arccos, here's how we solve this complicated integral" but I gain much by a methodical treatment. Why learn these differently? – SRobertJames Jun 29 '23 at 18:06
  • @SRobertJames What's being taught is general problem-solving principles (use substitutions to simplify when possible) and specific techniques (think at Weierstrass substitutions in trig equations). But actually solving a problem takes experience in using those tools, and skills of "math pattern" recognition to tell which one(s) may be useful in a given case. That's a skill built on practice, which cannot possibly be taught because each problem is different and there is no algorithmic recipe guaranteed to succeed (no, not even for integrals). – dxiv Jun 29 '23 at 20:57

1 Answers1

8

Hopefully you have an advisor you can talk to about all these things, because in the limited channel of an MSE textbox there's only so much one can say. But, I'll say a few things.

Don't overthink this. In particular, don't obsess about contest math. Instead, follow what interests you... if you are interested in analysis, study analysis.

Those specific bulleted algebra problems you list are not particularly relevant to analysis. Algebra issues do come up, like the links in item 6, but deal with those issues as they arise.

Motivated by those links in item 6, I will add this. If there is one sub-topic within algebra that will be useful in more advanced analysis, it's Linear Algebra: eventually you will need to learn about vector spaces and inner products and norms and linear functionals and dual spaces and so on. But still, all of that only comes later in analysis. So I'll circle back to saying "follow what interests you..."

Lee Mosher
  • 120,280
  • As someone who pursues contest math, I have to say that "follow interests" is not the way to go. You have to study what is tested in contests. – IraeVid Jun 28 '23 at 15:08
  • 1
    That may be, but the OP is not asking how to pursue contest math. – Lee Mosher Jun 28 '23 at 15:10
  • "The OP is not asking how to pursue contest math." Correct. I have zero interest in contest math per se. I am very interested in learning analysis, abstract algebra, etc., but went back to build my skills because I saw myself repeatedly getting stuck on manipulations (like the ones I linked). > "If there is one sub-topic within algebra that will be useful in more advanced analysis, it's Linear Algebra" - Wonderful, because I have studied Linear Algebra and do well on it; I find it doesn't require manipulations similar to the ones I linked, but rather deep understanding

    – SRobertJames Jun 28 '23 at 17:18
  • "Algebra issues do come up, like the links in item 6, but deal with those issues as they arise". When they do come up, do you recommend simply learning the minimum needed for that problem? Or using it as an opportunity and to dig deeper into the relevant technique? If so, how would you go about digging deeper? I generally do better when I'm able to put the technique into context and not just seen it pulled out of a hat.

    – SRobertJames Jun 29 '23 at 00:10