This might work, but would it be the most efficient way of going about this? I have two thoughts:
1. I mentioned this because of the "context" problem that querido brought up. For instance, the strategy that you mention would allow you to retain the ability (call it ability A) to arbitrarily evaluate some Scheme code in a few seconds, regardless of the context. This is nice, but what if that's more than what you wanted? Suppose instead you didn't want to know any Scheme at all offhand, but you wanted the ability (call this ability B) to be able to review SICP for 30 minutes and then be able to evaluate some Scheme code. Ability A implies ability B perhaps, but suppose all you really want is ability B. Doesn't it stand to reason that, over the years, ability A will take longer to maintain than ability B? 2. Not all mental skills can be called memory. Suppose you wanted to retain the ability to multiply two arbitrary 3 digit numbers in your head in 30 seconds. It wouldn't make sense to make a bunch of cards depicting various specific numbers to multiply. To me, remembering how to program or how to do linear algebra falls in the grey area between remembering the definition of a word and "remembering" how to ride a bicycle. Cheers, -- Ben ----------------- Original message ----------------- From: Gwern Branwen <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2009 21:05:11 -0400 ... What if you have a deck principally of small examples and questions? I've been learning Scheme through SICP, the SICP online tester, and the R5RS report defining Scheme; I have essentially copied all the small examples of syntax and semantics I've come across (and added new ones by modifying those examples to cover in detail edge cases I didn't understand). While some of my cards are definition-style (for fundamental functions), most of them are those examples - 'evaluate these 3 expressions' ultimate result', 'is this syntax correct: yes/no' etc. Why wouldn't this approach let me understand random Scheme I come across in ten years - modulo the advanced stuff I simply haven't gotten to yet, or the use of libraries I don't know? Certainly I would expect it to. I don't see any reason why this couldn't be true of linear algebra. Is it that you don't have a mass of problems and examples for linear algebra, only an impoverished set of definitions and theorems? - -- gwern --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mnemosyne-proj-users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mnemosyne-proj-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
