I am following an educator where he gives statement and proves them, as normal. But he uses rigorous maths to prove them and my goal is just to know and apply math. Should I skip the proofs. The proofs are length and skipping them feels like I am loosing a lot of things?
This discussion is actually deep. It is really a philosophical question: how low-level is enough just to use a piece of knowledge. Taking learning python as an example, if you just want to learn python for daily lightweight use, why bothering go deep to understand how built-in methods are implemented, how OS schedules jobs, how contexts are switched in CPU, how electrons move between silicons chips. Don’t get me wrong, all these are necessary and useful to become a python expert. But with limited time, you have to choose what to learn based on your need. IMO just learn the ones you really need now, and you will eventually get back to the proofs if you really need them in the future.