I’ve been considering another run at Anki or similar, because I simultaneously found a new segment of a field to learn about and also because I am going to have to pivot my technical learning at work soon.
Reading Michael Nielson’s essay on the subject, he makes frequent references to Feynman; I am wondering about the utility of using Anki to remember complex problems in better detail. The motivation is the famous story about Feynman where he always kept a bunch of his favorite open problems in mind, and then whenever he encountered a new technique he would test it against each problem. In this way, allegedly, he made several breakthroughs regarded as brilliant.
It feels to me like the point might be more broad and fundamental than mathematical techniques; I suspect if I could better articulate and memorize an important problem, I could make it more a part of my perspective rather than something I periodically take a crack at. If I can accomplish this, I expect I will be more likely to even notice relevant information in the first place.
I haven’t thought about doing this with open problems, but I really like the idea and feel like I’ve done it implicitly with a number of problems important to me (coordination issues, moloch, etc).
I do however, do this explicitily when I learn new solutions, making sure I integrate them into my world model, can instinctively frame problems using those models, and tie them to other potential solutions.
It feels like beginning to explicitly to do this with problems is a large next step that could really take effectiveness to the next level. Thanks!
...their prior learning has given them better chunking abilities, and so situations most people would see as complex they see as simple, and they find it much easier to reason about.
...
In other words, having more chunks memorized in some domain is somewhat like an effective boost to a person’s IQ in that domain.
where the chunks in question fit into the 7+/-2 of working memory. Relatedly, there is Alan Kay’s quip:
“A change in perspective is worth 80 IQ points.”
Which is to say the new perspective provides a better way to chunk complex information. In retrospect this feels obvious, but my model for multiple perspectives beforehand mostly a matter of eliminating blind spots they might have. I’ll have to integrate the contains-better-chunks possibility, which basically means that seeking out new perspectives is more valuable than I previously thought.
I’ve been considering another run at Anki or similar, because I simultaneously found a new segment of a field to learn about and also because I am going to have to pivot my technical learning at work soon.
Reading Michael Nielson’s essay on the subject, he makes frequent references to Feynman; I am wondering about the utility of using Anki to remember complex problems in better detail. The motivation is the famous story about Feynman where he always kept a bunch of his favorite open problems in mind, and then whenever he encountered a new technique he would test it against each problem. In this way, allegedly, he made several breakthroughs regarded as brilliant.
It feels to me like the point might be more broad and fundamental than mathematical techniques; I suspect if I could better articulate and memorize an important problem, I could make it more a part of my perspective rather than something I periodically take a crack at. If I can accomplish this, I expect I will be more likely to even notice relevant information in the first place.
I haven’t thought about doing this with open problems, but I really like the idea and feel like I’ve done it implicitly with a number of problems important to me (coordination issues, moloch, etc).
I do however, do this explicitily when I learn new solutions, making sure I integrate them into my world model, can instinctively frame problems using those models, and tie them to other potential solutions.
It feels like beginning to explicitly to do this with problems is a large next step that could really take effectiveness to the next level. Thanks!
Short mashup from two sources:
Nielson proposes an informal model of mastery:
where the chunks in question fit into the 7+/-2 of working memory. Relatedly, there is Alan Kay’s quip:
Which is to say the new perspective provides a better way to chunk complex information. In retrospect this feels obvious, but my model for multiple perspectives beforehand mostly a matter of eliminating blind spots they might have. I’ll have to integrate the contains-better-chunks possibility, which basically means that seeking out new perspectives is more valuable than I previously thought.