On some days I'd like to give myself a full pi(e) but then I look at all the lemma beans and know I can only take half at best.

5 though I compensate for this with high logical ability (hmm sounds like a game how math point points youve got, whats your logic skill)

If 10 is a PhD in math, I'm about a 4. I understand what most calculus and algebra means in a 2D or 3D universe, and can use a TI-89 to solve every single math/calculus problem I've come across in making games.

I'd rate myself at 5.478329

(seriously, without any kind of scale a numeric rating is pointless)

eπ i + 1.

Perhaps this is a social experiment to see how we'd react without a scale? Anyway, if Ph.D. = 10, I'll say I'm a 5 - I'm in Calculus right now, and I know some of the basics of Topology, Linear Algebra, and so forth.

Quote: Original post by ApochPiQ
eπ i + 1.

Deliciously contradictory. [smile]

Maybe a 7 but I'm rusty in some areas. For anything closely related to 3D graphics, I'd probably be a 8 or 9 though.

Trying to rate my math skills using this rating systems is like comparing apples to orangutans.

I agree with the comments that the scale needs some calibration. If I define 10 to be the level of mathematical understanding held by the best mathematician I know, then I'd rank myself at about a 3. But I've got a bachelor degree with a maths major and am qualified to be a maths teacher. [smile]

Plus maths is a very large field. Even PhDs in mathematics are likely to be strong only in one area. For me, I'm still pretty good at arithmetic and extremely strong in linear algebra (although I bet some of the graphics wizards here are sharper). I'm very good with logic and while I'm not that great at formal geometry I've got an intuition for it. However I'm a visual thinking and can have difficulties with abstract topology, especially anything that involves more than three dimensions - which is a pity, because I've had to use it a fair bit. I'm also not that great with heavy mathematical jargon, which is a liability - show me a diagram any day.

So yeah, I give myself about a three for that. If you work with someone near a 10 then you really start to feel mathematically inadequate.

Quote: Original post by Promit
To offer further calibration, I'll agree with the 10 = Phd and set myself as a 6. I can do linear algebra, calculus (including multivariate and basic differential equations), some geometry/computational geometry, etc. But I'm not great at any of it.

But this thread still makes no sense.

Yeah this is a poorly framed question without any idea of who would fall into a 10 or 1 for that matter?
IMO if 10 is the absolute highest for all people Ramanajan would be in the 10 category. Someone like Einstein a 9? A PHD around 8. College graduate that majored in math/science and actually had to take multivariable calculus,et around 7. General public 5 or below LOL!
So I guess I'd have to give myself an overestimated and overinflated 7 LOL.
Anyways, I think the original poster probably meant to limit this to game programmers but didn't clarify?
To see how your question makes no sense read this little paragraph on a mathematician ranking fellow mathematican's LOL:
" On one occasion in ranking mathematicians on the basis of pure talent, he gave Ramanujan the highest score of 100. On this scale, he gave the great German mathematician Hilbert a score of 80. Hardy gave himself a score of only 25, but said his colleague Littlewood merited 30 since he was the more talented of the two."
http://www.hinduonnet.com/mag/2002/12/22/stories/2002122200040400.htm

On the otherhand if we are limiting ourself to game programming specifically, I'd suggest using someone like John Carmack as a 10 for knowing enough math to develop a cutting edge game engine. 8/9 actually knowing enough math to write or be working the next version of DirectX or OpenGL. 7 knowing enough math to make your own 3D engine. 5 not knowing enough math to write your own 3D engine that you have to rely on 3rd party API's,etc.

[Edited by - daviangel on April 26, 2009 5:06:08 PM]