#book-recommendations
1 messages · Page 46 of 1
Can anyone tell me the differences between the various probability books written by at least one of Grimmett or Stirzaker. For instance there is Probability and Random Processes by the pair of them, Probability an Introduction by Grimmett and Welsh, and Elementary Probability by Stirzaker.
I think they cover mostly the same things but I would default to Grimmett and Stirzaker (the one with 4 editions)
https://www.math.arizona.edu/~tgk/464_f18/texts.html
suggests it is 'high level' - and I would say yes, it does not hide harder material, but GS never strays into talking about the unimaginably abstract
I'm trying to investigate them myself too, elementary probability by Stirzaker certainly seems to be targeting a "lower level" based on the exercises at the end of the 1st chapter 
Perhaps Grimmett Welsh should be compared to Ross' First Course as well
ah thank you this is very helpful
Grimmett and Stirzaker is both a textbook and reference. It's just really good
IMO, if you want study more about differential functions (e.g. you really like differential geometry or functions), Tu's book is a good way to learn about AT. Hatcher's book stresses more about geometric intuitions. If you like more about topology (e.g. low dimensional topology, knots and such), you should choose Hatcher.
I was looking into Ross's, how would you compare it to Grimmett and Stirzaker? I like that it seems to open with a chapter on basic combinatorics even though I do already have that background.
i dont like anything
i just want the thing most grad schools expect
like the most core thing
Moreover, I recall tu's book includes spectral sequence while Hatcher has a seperate book for that.
i need to do that actually cuz i am very bad with analysis
i only stopped at like
radon-nikodym
and basic functional analysis like the uniform principle or somthing
Then I guess Hatcher. Because only anecdotally, but I hear more people use Hatcher.
uniform boundedness 😻
yea
Though a lot of people dont like Hatcher but indeed a lot of people do use Hatcher
is AT a more core subject than diff geo?
in diff geo someone recommended Tu's textbook and i relaly liked it
i managed to make progress in it ( it was easy )
so i know where to learn diff geo atleast
but idk any AT
also i like a more diff thm proof style
hatcher is like a novel mfao
I am trying to read through classical Fourier analysis rn
maybe you can check it out if you have time
i have free time for any math i like for like 3 days for now haha
i just finished my algebra exam
yesterday

🏺
I am not in the US so I have no idea what core means here. For me it is more relevant what subject you want to research on.
yeah i get u
well ig both wont hurt lmfao
My friends working on knots like Hatcher's book
The problem about AT is it is a very big subject and recent years it undergoes some modern renovation.
It is very hard to learn everything. You have to make a choice somehow.
yea im just like hovering over the basic stuff
i still dk what i like about math so i just want to learn the ground stuff in everything first
I mean some people are still arguing what is really basic about AT. Weeks ago someone tries to convince me that, since category theory is more accepted nowadays, it is more clear to starts with simplicial sets, then homotopy theory, under the assumption people can learn AT before differential geometry.
for me homotopy theory seems advacned ig
i would guess like u would go fundamental groups --> covering spaces and maybe like homology but idk
Ross' First Course is really a first course, it will explain everything. I don't think you will need it in general, unless you find Grimmett too hard
thank you 
It is the way a lot of people including me learned about AT. Nowaday I do feel like sometimes I do not get a good exposure to homotopy theory.
Maybe talk to some of your professors?
They are much more experienced than me. In their research, what do they use and what kind of AT do they think a student should learn
Just a note, if you're starting out and don't get Chapter 1 (specifically, sigma algebras and probability space formalism), maybe don't sweat too much about it. First courses hardly concern themselves with formalisation with probability. You do want to get used to random variables and random variable algebra
The book itself notes as well: you should gather intuition first
(image is immediately after defining random variable)
yea will do that
on what textbook they use
for their courses
i agree with all of what ur saying
I had been given the impression it's not worth getting too fussy about the formalism until you are approaching it in a measure-theoretic setting
There is that
But also, formalism really helps in seeing things sometimes
Because all we have in math is formalism 
So I like the fact that it's presented, rather than hidden as many courses would choose
Hatcher's book isn't great for knots
Depending on what you are aiming for there's lots of good knot specific references
Burde & Zieschang's Knots is good
Very comprehensive
Lickorish's An Introduction To Knot Theory is also nice
Most of these will assume a background in algebraic topology & abstract algebra
I don't believe any of them cover finite type invariants either
I know very little about knots. When I ask about AT reference years ago, a friend recommends hatcher's AT. He is a PhD student working on knots at that time. For him, I think hatcher's AT is kind of more geometric compared to May's AT.
Haha
May's Concise is a VERY different kind of textbook
It is not recommended for a first approach
More geometric is really an understatement
hatcher is very geometric
People normally take a course in differential geometry or topology before AT. I doubt if otherwise someone who knows not much geometry but have a solid background in algebra, he will like more about May's book.
To a fault.
abstract algebra...
oh right
lemme see what book we used in A.Alg
but the actual prereq is geometric intuition to understand whatever hatcher is thinking when he dumps a half-page wall of text on you
not clicking on that
Abstract Algebra: Theory and Applications, Thomas W. Judson, Full Text, 2022 edition
Me when I click on a edu link and get my entire network DDOS'd

Hi guys
Can someone recommend me book for coordinate geometry that gives me idea to approach problems
maybe give a try to "art and craft of problem solving"
Instant click
My life was easier a couple of days ago. I lost access to my university library because I am alumni account. Is this sad or what?
No more high quality pdfs ):
The pdfs on that website aren't high quality
i wonder if were talking about the same website
now that u mention it
since im getting researcher freebies from my uni
what real analysis texts talk about total variation and absolute continuity (for real functions, not the general definition for measures)
i should get springer
try manfred stoll introduction to real analysis
does this look lowq to u?
hmm does it talk about the things I mentioned in later chapters?
Bro are u just advertising this book 😭
ur the one who asked for it
nah like
I’m asking for a book that has specifically this stuff (at least)
Carothers does. Total variation is in Chapter 13, and absolute continuity is in Chapter 20.
(note: absolute continuity is mentioned in the context of measures but it's a definition for real functions)
Thanks
You're welcome, let me know if you get into it
Give me a good book recommendation for undergraduate college algebra.
Probably good to specify whether you mean hs algebra or abstract algebra
anyone know what prereqs to stein and shakarchi vol 3 and vol 4 are?
they said undergraduate college algebra, so not sure what the confusion is here
College => University? Aren't those synonyms
Or is college a synonym for highschool in the us or something
they said undergraduate college algebra, ie, university level algebra, not high school related. As far as I understand
so no clarification needed
I think
but some places have "college algebra" as in #prealg-and-algebra from what I heard?

Ohk thanks
hello this might be a bit of a different request but i'm currently looking for books on the history of calculus (pretty sure thats the topics name in english, the one with integrals an derivitives) are there any good books or articles out there? i tried to find some but my english is not my first language so it's hard to find the right search words
can anyone give me a roamap to study maths from algebra1
nd the concepts involved
dm me
Wow this is really useful, wish I had this before. Everything all in one place
Anyone have reading recommendations for spirals? I'm looking to learn about hyperbolic spirals, but also an overview of the types of spiral that comes up frequently in mathematics.
linear algebra book that focuses more on proofs and less on repetitive computation?
strogatz, "Nonlinear dynamics and chaos"
I've been studying from axler and enjoying it. It's very clean and covers some nice topics, I would recommend you supplement the eigenvalues section and determinant section as a minimum though
see pins for some second courses
there are also proof-based first courses
see here: #book-recommendations message
What sort of stuff have you learned already?
Godel Escher Bach is fire although math is only a theme, not the singular focus
still have dreams of record players lol
anyone recommond websites/books for calculus 1 problems w solutions
immediately above is calc 3 but it's a natural continuation
do you have stuff for practice midterm
I've never read it, but you might be interested in http://intrologic.stanford.edu/public/chapters.php
from the preface:
Unlike most books and textbooks on logic, this one purports to teach logic not so much as a subject to study, but rather as a tool to master and use for performing and structuring correct reasoning. It introduces classical logic rather informally, with very few theorems and proofs (which are mainly located in the supplementary sections). Nevertheless, the exposition is systematic and precise, without compromising on the essential technical and conceptual issues and subtle points inherent in logic.
so it's not a book for studying logic as a subject in its own right, such as mendelson, enderton, leary and kristiansen, etc.
ill take that as a no
Did you take a look at the free Stanford book I linked you to?
Basic fundamentals of algebra
Cool, I hope you enjoy it. I had already learned a lot of that material elsewhere from a few disparate sources but I read several chapters of that book somewhat recently because I wanted a source that presented this stuff in a more unified way than I'd learned it in the past.
Does anyone have a reference where I can learn how to parse a sentence like "The second derivative is to be regarded as a bilinear map from $\mathbb{R}^n\times\mathbb{R}^n\to\mathbb{R}^m$, namely $$(v_1,v_2)\mapsto\left(\sum_{j,k=1}^n\frac{\partial^2 f_1}{\partial x_j\partial x_k}(v_{1,j}v_{2,k}),\dotsc,\sum_{k,j=1}^n\frac{\partial ^2 f_m}{\partial x_j\partial x_k}(v_{1,j}v_{2,k})\right)$$"?
I've taken first-year univariate calculus and intro proof-based linear algebra. I'm taking vector calculus, but it does not go near anything like this
person2709505
any book recommendations regarding mental math?
Free Open Source College Algebra Trigonometry Precalculus Textbooks by Carl Stitz and Jeff Zeager
everything u need at this point
lets keep buying overpriced outdated tomes instead
Hey does anyone have a recommendation for a recreational math book? Something with riddles that'll keep me entertained on long commutes
Maybe try "Combinatorial Problems and Exercises" by Laszlo Lovasz?
Looks just like what I'm looking for but damn American books are really expensive.
I don't mind spending money on a good book but I've seen books for over 500$ even for a hardcover that's a lot.
a couple messages down i suggested smullyan as well for recreational puzzles in logic
How advanced is that?
if only there were websites to get a free pdf version for free , but i would never recommend such a act ofcourse.
Never ever.
they can be read with little mathematical background
here's some example puzzles
Looks amazing.
Thanks a lot Ill order it right away
Have you done it? My impression is that it is considerably difficult. Also, a huge book. But I havent done a lot of problems from there, tho I will
Engel's book is also really good, but not easy. But there are solutions to all the problems
I have not but my prof recommended it
And it seemed a bit like the kinds of stuff you could just toss around in your head
https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/art-of-mathematics-take-two/BA4DEE26663A2376FF1038BD0258531C this looks cool
That's also what I thought, the level is okay as I'm a math major and I can always come back to the problems I couldn't solve once I reach the requirements but 25cm is a huge book to carry around all day
Something's onNumber theory would also be nice
Oh I see
volume 2 is nt, volume 4 is combinatorics, I like them
they are all probably really good, level is intermediate Id say, and usually start from first principles.
Also these books are very small and light
well not all those books are the same level probably
because some are essentially about China mathematical olympiad, which is harder than the IMO. But for example volume 4 is not intended to go that far (stated in the preface)
That looks just like what I was looking for.
I think I'm going to buy the ebook. I am going to need it I am currently on a night train to Austria and I won't be home until 11:00AM
I like Olympiad problems they are perfect for passing time
That happens more often than I'd like to admit. I tend to start a lot but don't get back to all of them
Are you from Spain by any chance?
yeah
are there any good pre calculus worksheets etc
Any book recommendations for statistical mechanics/thermo with a math focus?
any books for precalc?
as someone who speaks vietnamese natively and is trying to study how to read and write vietnamese, i'd like to recommend the following books:
https://www.tuttlepublishing.com/vietnam/elementary-vietnamese-9780804855150
https://www.tuttlepublishing.com/vietnam/continuing-vietnamese-9780804857628
it should be noted that the book teaches the hanoi dialect, which is in the northern part of vietnam. my family and i speak a southern dialect. if you are american, this is probably the most common dialect you will encounter. however, southerners generally understand the hanoi dialect just fine.
downloadable content for those books can be found here:
https://tuttlepublishing.com/downloadable-content
the downloadable content includes audio for you to listen to.
yo what..
you asked for precalc, no?
bro look at the link
lol
that first season is 🔥
:o alr
havent seen alot of math sorcerer
he is a pretty cool guy. I never had problems with his recommendations.
facts
What is a good book for people starting mathematical proof?
proofs: a long-form mathematics textbook by Jay Cummings
I heard of that
I would suggest aluffis notes: An introduction to advanced mathematics, and also I would suggest using what yoy learn in a course like 18.06 on mit ocw
Thanks for this recommendation. If I ever got to visit Vietnam I would like to learn some of the language so I could actually talk with real people and not just do sightseeing
I need a book recommendation for studying partial differential equations
I have read L.C Evans
Could i have course or book recommendations for learning about fourier series and the fft algorithm?
And what kind of background knowledge do i need? Multi variable calculus, partial differential equations, etc?
Struggling to fill in the gaps from my own high school maths curriculum
How to Prove it: A Structured Approach
I love the math sorcerer
is there some suggestions about pure exercise books of elementary number theory and linear algebra?
i found him on my recommendations like 2 weeks ago
i really like his voice
Is he the guy who sort of obviously works out?
i guess
he has vids about working out
Yeah seems like a really nice and cool dude, he made a good video about Bartle and Sherbert's Analysis book that I liked
what book offers calc 2 and multivariable calc in a more abstract and rigorous way than stewart's calc
and what does it require as prerequisites
What is Calc 2?
Second half of a single variable calculus class
What is covered there?
(sorry maybe that is a waste of time to ask you to answer that)
So I wanted to make sure my school wasn't unique in this regard so I found a few places online
You are rather thorough
Basically, you do some integration topics (substitution if you didn't already get to it, parts, partial fraction decomposition, trigonometric integrals, and improper integrals), differential equations, sequences and series, and power/Taylor series
I see. I think @keen orbit will have trouble finding one book that covers that abstractly along with multivariate stuff. Probably two different books will be better in my opinion
Thank you for looking into that.
Yeah it's not super common to have something that does both single variable and multivariable calculus in one go, and in particular just the second half of the single variable stuff
Does anyone have anything to say about either of these books? I'm thinking about studying the one on the left to get some more background for my intuition before diving into the one on the right. or just doing the one on the right and skipping the one on the left
ok then what are 2 different books
i have already read all of stewart
So in that case I'd recommend you a book on analysis
i am reading linear alg by greub rn
isnt it better to study LA before real analysis ?
Really it's better to study it before calc 3. Single variable analysis doesn't rest on linear algebra, multivariable does
Much more than that
The fact that you take a matrix of partial derivatives is a linear algebra fact, that the derivative is a linear approximation
Many ideas in calc 3 boil down to this fact
which matrix of partial derivatives are you talking about
Jacobian matrix
The fact that you take a matrix of partial derivatives, the chain rule, you'll soon learn the inverse/implicit function theorems, etc
All of that as thinking of derivative as linear approximation
yea ive learnt all of these
I think it's a hard mistake that so many departments do calc 3 first, at least from a conceptual angle (I think they prob do it since some other majors are trying to rush you getting there)
actually at first i started with LA by axler after i was done from series which is end of calc 2
then tried friedberg
but i didnt dive alot
i barely studied some stuff about vector spaces
but didnt like these 2 books
FIS is basically the standard nowadays. Axler has a stupid dogma surrounding determinants
so i stopped and jumped to calc 3
Greub is higher powered than both
after calc 3 i started searching for LA book
i asked about some books here you gave me some recommendations
i chose shilov's but i didnt like the starting with dets
so went to greub now
Are you liking it?
greub is more fun
H&K >>
the fact that it talks about vector spaces as groups and so on
it is showing interactions between LA and abstract algebra
Yeah Greub is basically the ultimate reference on linear algebra as far as can tell
thats a big claim
it is harder than FIS and axler's but it is more abstract and fun
Maybe along with Roman or smth. I've seen a description once which said yeah one day you may need to know 10 ways to decompose a matrix. Your options are Greub and Bourbaki, go with Greub
i am finding some problems with proofs bc i am basically considered new to proofs but i will get into that with time
or 5 i guess
See why Greub is the ultimate? 😛
i mean LA itself is considered intro to proof no ?
Nah but jokes aside a few are situational
It's a decent one yeah. Honestly many subjects can be used to introduce people to proofs
the most ive used were for a computing class
Discrete math and linear algebra are probably easier than calculus in that regard since you don't have nested quantifiers
i think analysis is probably a rougher intro to proofs
but doesnt analysis need LA
I mean idk many either. LU factorization is basically Gaussian elimination. QR factorization is Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization matrixified
yea sometimes
Polar/singular value decomposition is extremely important
yeah i know lu qr svd polar cholesky
Eg low rank approximation to matrices
i think its called youngs theorem or something
Some decompositions from Lie theory which tbh might be variants of the ones you mention. Cartan, Bruhat, Iwasawa decomposition
eckart-young
So the first approximation to what analysis is is, you're trying to make notions from calculus rigorous
the first time I saw the definition of an algebra was in a grad algebra class
So in calculus you'll learn the idea of limits. But then what exactly is the definition of a limit? What's the sup property of R? How do we prove all those facts and rules that we use in calculus?
but then second time was in diff top
you then dive into epsilon delta def
If you're working in one variable you don't need linear algebra, but once you do multiple variables and you're giving the theory needed in calc 3, then yeah you're referencing linear algebra a lot more
As for where you learn what an algebra is, on paper you can do a bit even in linear algebra
If anything you'd mostly care about polynomial and matrix algebras
wdym by on paper
Meaning not all LA books will use that terminology
Really an algebra is basically just a vector space that's also a ring
So for instance, if V is a vector space, the linear maps V->V form a vector space, right?
I can add them and I can scale them
i was asking bc i saw this in LA by greub eventhough rings,ideals and related stuff are introduced in ring theory prob?
yea for sure
The full force treatment of those topics would be in an algebra class. But you do have to play with polynomials, in fact polynomials in matrices/linear maps, already in linear algebra
for me personally I didn't see the definition of an algebra in any of my undergrad classes, even the one focused on ring theory
So some books just decide to introduce it right away and use it
for me i didnt even see sequences and series in class bc i am still high school XD
i am last year high school finally
yes they are introduced early in axler's book for example
I mean Axler kinda does the algebra in a dodgy way
greub is the best
but i was asking for a more rigorous/abstract book than stewart calc to check what it covers and the level it covers
That's exactly what analysis is
ik but is there a calc book like that
or the most level of rigor of calc is level of stewart
Spivak
isnt spivak analysis
I mean calculus is part of analysis
It's just that usually if a class is called calculus they're taking a non-rigorous angle on certain topics in analysis
Exceptions include stuff like Spivak and Apostol
I have taken calc 1-3, etc, in my engineering undergrad, and I am finding Spivak to be way more rigorous but not hopelessly abstract
Usually Calc 1-3 dont ask for proofs
are there many editions of these books just like stewarts
I dont think you will find hopelessly abstract math until later on
I did maybe 4 epsilon delta proofs in my calc. 1. class, but it wasn't the focus
Stewart I think is uniquely edition-inflated
But since you are engineering you don't need a rigorous understanding of too much
this was to prove that the value of limit to be something
Yup, the formal definition of the limit is delta-epsilon
thats a point too
Tbh, I don't entirely buy that explanation... Most of the computations you do in calc. 1 through 3 are not things you do often in the average engineering career
If you want to broaden your horizon with what you can do with math you don't necessarily need rigor. There is a certain point where there will be some tricks that you won't fully understand though
Usual calc 1-3 classes are trying to simultaneously appeal to many different types of people
It's stuff that you have to understand, and depending on where you end up, sure you might need to do an integral
Some people in the audience are math students. Some are physics students. Some are chem. Some are engineering. Some are compsci. Some are econ. etc etc
So if you say oh we don't need to teach engineers this topic since they won't actually use it
Well... maybe the economists or the theoretical physicists will need it
And now your class is deficient for them so they open their own in house "Math for econ/physics" class and you lose funding
It can happen yeah
That's fair, but by that logic, you should cover everything that anyone taking the class will need
ive seen it happen with statistics too
Since physics needed different stuff
My undergrad was pre-cs then it turned into data analyst
I'm an early adopter
And opened their own in house math for physics classes
I mean for the most part I think they probably do, or they have multiple variants of the class
I took a "statistics for chemical engineers" and my stat courses for my minor
I have an IT and a CS background but CS was taught horribly back in mid 2010s
esp AP CS
They wouldn't let me substitute, and the engineering class was taught by someone who could use stat, but really shouldn't have been teaching it
things have gotten better
Math department can (and often will) just make the math majors sit through a calculus class devoid of conceptual content and then later make you do it properly in analysis
I also did AutoCAD and Autodesk Inventor when I was given a lenovo school laptop
But Dell laptops are much better
are these books you have already bought or are these library copies? i wanted to suggest another book but money might be a factor for you
yea its too much work that's why i moved to a local college
its either that or i have a scholarship that enables me to live in dorms
on a uni
And they'll do the same for linear algebra and differential equations if you decide to study those
@remote sparrow go ahead these are library copies
they dont do that where I come from though
it's marketed as an undergraduate textbook, but it covers some graduate topics.
i heard this is good too
it's okay to keep the brown and churchill copy on hand if you want to read about some applications. a more advanced book that covers applications would be this book: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/complex-variables/08A62E6DB03F5D5435F5DE6260618002
Thanks!
this is a good reference too
it's missing some topics in the standard graduate curriculum though
It's less common outside the United States. Students often have to make up their minds sooner about their degree (perhaps they even apply directly to it), funding works differently, and in general the US has a very hand holding style when it comes to certain things in education that isn't as prevalent everywhere else
is this baby rudin?
I have blue one same with that book
Orange is the new black.
I am still had it in my room
adult rudin should always be green (although it's allowable if it came with a blue dust jacket like mine did)
i think it should be dead black
Is there a really good book to learn calculus for beginners
stewart
edition doesnt matter
if you are feeling spicy try spivak
alright, is it college level?
its a very common book used in calculus
and it's pretty good
its like a 6/10 for math majors and like 8-9/10 for literally everyone else
Is there a free pdf of it?
i cannot link pdfs here because piracy is against the rules but you can probably find one quite easily online
ah okay
@gray gazelle I got an older edition for about $15 on thriftbooks.com
Might buy, thanks!
Just received my salary
Idk which edition to buy
It has to be a simple one
edition does not matter
Hi. Just for curiosity... what is an interesting book talking about themes of undergraduate or masters level algebra applied to analysis, or numerical analysis or pdes (any of those)?
Except for the more usual linear algebra stuff.
should I buy it used?
also does anyone have book recommendations for geometry
Any good books for real analysis?
Any course or book recommendations for learning about fourier series and the fft algorithm?
And what kind of background knowledge do i need? Multi variable calculus, partial differential equations, etc?
I’m struggling to fill in my gaps from my own high school curriculum
You can borrow it on that library, archive.org, if you make an account. But you could buy it used if you wanted
Ohh thanksill do that
There are other editions of that book with slightly different titles on there as well
should I do this
also is this good
i thought it would be good to have atleast one real life textbook so idk if that is good
Pre-algebra: https://archive.org/details/prealgebraaccele0000dolc
Anyone please?
Any good companion material for Spivak's Calculus? I've been working through it and having a great time. He doesn't explicitly write everything down which I've found to be very helpful since it forces me to connect the dots.
But occasionally I get stuck and it would be nice to have a secondary resources to go alongside it. I've seen some lecture notes online, but they're very set theory heavy and I'm not familiar with it.
I'd like to have another proofs-based Calc1/Cal2 book to go along side it.
Preferably one that doesn't use set theory (like Spivak).
I liked Bartle's
Understanding Analysis by Stephen Abbott
I used Bartle and Sherbert and liked it.
Not exactly a book recommendation, any tips at reducing eye-strain if you want to keep reading on laptop?
Besides closing your eyes because you can't read with eyes closed
thats actually a good question
No it might be stupid
i mean by that point i print the damn pdf
high chance its stupid
no copyright here
yes
i mainly watch him for his book reviews
real analysis Elon lages Lima :3
roodin ❤️
Rudin, it's quite complex, start with measurement, if you don't know measurement you don't know Rudin, moreover, it will be difficult to learn.
It's a bit ambiguous in this setting whether Baby Rudin or Big Rudin is being talked about here
Though I'd more likely guess Baby Rudin
@sage python i suggest checking chill
Any Indian here who has got a copy of Abstract Algebra by Dummit and Foote? If so, how..?
nope
I had "The Elements of Real Analysis" in mind.
Blue light glasses
They are very helpful 🙂
Like a physical copy?
yes
I got it from Amazon
for how much..?
you mean the 13,000Rs. one?
I think like 650-700
That was 6 years ago lol
dang it
Your best bet is to get it printed
as in, how?
Get the pdf from a certain website and send it to Printster to print it
Probably cut the book into two parts to get two volumes
is that legal..?
can you pay for the pdf like an ebook insomeway?
The certain website part is illegal and the printing part also probably 
You'll be fine as long as it stays in India
I mean most governments probably wouldn't be bruh moment enough to prosecute a person over pirating a book
a friend of mine got a fine of 300 euros by post when he pirated a movie in denmark, lol (didn't have any bypasses, just moved in)

Get an e-ink tablet, like supernote, boox, kindle, etc.
This is why I said, it's fine in India. Privacy is least of the concerns
@remote sparrow do you think this book binding is fine?
is this supposed to be new?
this is a paperback?
Yes, new paperback
i'd probably return this
alr
Dark mode and a good font + 🔎 skills
Hi, I need some advice on math. I want to restart my math journey. My first year of college I was put into calculus 1 and struggled badly. I am currently at a community college. I was wondering if I should take college algebra to help me get started?
You could check out that Dolciani book I recommended called Algebra : structure and method: https://archive.org/details/algebra00brow . Flip through the table of contents and see if you already know that material. That is I think 9th grade algebra in the U.S.
If you find you know those topics already, I recommend trying this book, it's pre-calculus (they used to call that "analysis" in U.S. high school): https://archive.org/details/modernintroducto00dolc/
Thank you very much, I will take a look at it!
You're welcome!
hello
Anyone happen to know any books on green's functions that can be dipped in and out of (i.e. I don't need to read it cover to cover to pick some things up). I also am going to be focusing on using them for ode's for now, so please no pde books...
hi is there any good book to understand elementary probability
conditional probability, partition theorem that kinda stuff
blitzstein and hwang
brilliant, cheers mate
Does anyone know of good sources for getting into Quarternion analysis?
( a.k.a. "Quarternionic Analysis" )
( It exists https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternionic_analysis )
( I've seen some books developing the algebra with Quarternions and Octonions, but I'm specifically looking for Quarternion analysis in this case please )
is basic mathematics by serge lang a good book for high school algebra
Yes
Another question, does anyone know of any good books or articles that are like "Counterexamples in Measure Theory" or something like that?
Do not use algebra by lang 
this is a companion volume to schilling's measure theory book
Thank you.
Any book reccomendations for geometry?
I'm new to geometry btw I just finished an algebra 1 textbook
I'm 13 btw so I can't really get anything over the price of like 60
khan academy is free
yeah I use Khan Academy all the time
hey wanna be friends
Harold Jacobs Geometry
AoPS stuff if you are interested in competitions
Kiselev is good too actually, but idk how well it matches the USA curriculum
ok
what are some references for order theory and lattice theory?
Would aops work for regular honors geometry?
depends on what aops stuff, but in general yes
I heard from a classmate that "Introduction to Lattices and Order" by Davey and Priestley is pretty good, but if you're interested in duality (which is really cool imo), there's "Stone Spaces" by Johnstone
it will work for it yes, but it might not rigidly match it (you may have to skip around) and the problems are likely to stretch you quite a bit more
any good books for number theory?
I’m looking for books that have very precise and clear explanations with worked examples
and then a few practice problems in there too would be nice
what kind of number theory are you looking for
like anything that saves time when working with numbers idk
like divisibility tests, modular arithmetic, maybe multiplying large numbers very fast if that’s even a thing?
i guess just proof based number theory
proving all the results
Good. Thanks
GH Hardy?
"Number Theory for Beginners" by Weil
I like apostol's intro to analytic number theory, has some cool stuff in it
though it's obviously aimed towards analysis in the latter chapters
This is like elementary nt
I don't think an analytic nt book rec is suitable (for now)
ehhhh I guess. the first few chapters cover the basics pretty well
though with multiplying large numbers they are probably wanting something more computational?
Honestly i don't think I've seen a text explicitly cover multiplying large numbers
nice
hi guys
what book do I need to solve this?
"Represent the polynomial ( f(x) = 3x^5 + x^4 + 15x^3 + 12x + 4 ) as the product of its linear factors."
Someone has leithold calculus in spanish?
no i have spivak in spanish @honest cave
Ah yes, "Stone Spaces". The book by the person who works with topoi, with a title "stone spaces", and the content is actually locales.
Good book from what (little) I've read in it so far tho
ohhh okey, thank you
And yeah the other text is a pretty decent one from what I've seen so far, but is an intro text afaik, so if you're looking for something advanced maybe look elsewhere
does anyone have some reference texts for introductory topos theory in the context of logic (so not grothendieck topoi)
I've worked through a bit of goldblatt's Topoi, but not finding it super helpful
I've heard mac lane and moerdijk's Sheaves in Geometry and Logic is good
but any additional resources would be appreciated
i want to learn calculus from scratch. can anyone recommend some good books?
Stewart
good for theory?
Spivak is calculus but can be treated as intro analysis
same for apóstol?
I do not know that one
I went down this rabbit hole a couple months back as well, and i found this https://www.fuw.edu.pl/~kostecki/ittt.pdf set of notes; (its not complete in some of the later sections but) it could help as another source of reference while learning
Page 5 also has a nice list of other resources for this subject, including those standard ones that you mentioned above as well
Since the semester started i hadn't gotten the chance to really read this subject so I'd appreciate it if you could let me know later on what you found good/helpful after you have tried it yourself 👍 🙏
currently studying for the SHSAT, any study material / website reccomendations?
See this: #book-recommendations message
Hi!
I was planning to make a general combinatorics book guide for my acquaintances. Can I get some aid from here? Thanks!
Note: There's no level of familiarity I can assume at the moment, so feel free to cover any difficulty range of books, as long as you think they're approachable by an undergrad.
I don't know. You can make an account on the Internet Archive and borrow the book hour-by-hour and check out the contents
When I took combinatorics I had a look through all the books suggested by my lecturer and the two that stood out as being the best for beginners were "A Walk Through Combinatorics" by Bona and "Invitation to Discrete Mathematics" by Matousek and Nesetril
ah
haven't heard of the latter, will check out, thanks!
what do you think of the books, by the way?
in terms of 'niceness' in your own metric, technical requirements and coverage
in terms of "niceness" I'd rate them very highly, I thought they were engagingly written (I find this rare in maths book) with good problem sets. I've seen other books where I think the problems tend to skew almost entirely too easy or entirely too hard. I don't remember them having any requirements that go beyond highschool maths (I'm UK based for context) and the coverage contained everything I think you would see in a first course and more (I can provide links if you want to see more detailed breakdowns). If you've done combinatorics for Olympiads in highschool I might recommend looking somewhere else unless you want some review, likewise I'd probably use different books to prep for competitions even though these would give you all the tools you need.
Miachel Sullivan's algebra and trigonometry or james stewart, lothar redlin and saleem Watson's precalculus mathematics for calculus?
Also I need a good geometry book which covers from basic to advanced or atleast first year college.
ok great, thanks!
Does edition matter for textbooks?
sometimes
Cuz the older editions are usually cheap
yes
But have less content or problems
The newer editions have way more problems and more content usually
But are more expensive
depends on what the subject matter is
Like for example: linear algebra
Say i want to buy Howard Anton's book. He has the old editions like 4th
And the newer editions like the 11th editions
Usually 4x the price
the marginal benefit of getting the latest edition of a book like, say, lay's Linear Algebra and Its Applications compared to getting a previous edition is not worth it
yes
So like for older subjects
With not much progressions in the past years
Like calculus has been calculus for a long time now haha
So for subjects that are already developed fully then its not worth it
An older edition will suffice
Well thanks very much. I am taking a class and they telling me to buy a linear book that costs 160$ cad and i dont want. Im gonna get the 4th edition which is like 10$ haha
Ah calculus did change haha
So like buying a calculus book made in 1980s is obsolete
So maybe for the calculus book, its better to buy like a more recent like maybe in year 2010
except if it is something like spivak or apostol
Can someone recommend
Ah yes. I took cal 1 and 2 but learnt it with stewart. I would really like to learn it with apostol
I heard its very challenging
if ur doing an engineering degree
Maybe when i take cal 3
Ah ok i am gonna do engineering haha
it's a joke
Oh hahahaha good one
you should just read an analysis textbook instead
Ah ok
Understanding Analysis by abbott is accessible
true
And what is analysis?
this electrical engineer used abbott
older editions can often be better than newer ones tbh
yeah zach is great
if not content-wise, then at least with respect to how well-made the book is
Yeah probably cuz back then school was harder
it varies from book to book, older editions of books like Stewart's Calculus tend to be better, but the 2nd edition of Artin's Algebra is superior to the first
the thing is @remote sparrow electrical engineers tend to need the math and they dont realise it until their doing 4th year stuff or grad level research
its quite common actually
Ah ur an electrical engineer nice
electronic engineer phd who works with me always tells me "ill deal with the bureacracy of publishing u just learn math"
I wanna do electrical engineer
i'm not an electrical engineering student
Ah well ill probably join it when i do my 1st semester in that
Rn il finishing up college
I think Apostol is a good choice for someone who isn't so set on pure maths (it's perfectly fine for those too however) fwiw
For me the most important thing in textbook are the problems they give
The theory is secondary
Cuz in a test ur tested on problems that u have to solve
Apostol has a good mix of involved computational problems and theoretical ones
it's better balanced than Spivak from that point of view imo
yeah Spivak is closer to straight up analysis than Apostol
wasnt apostol an engineer too?
in fact Spivak matches quite well with 1st year Analysis courses in the UK imo, since we don't tend to introduce topological notions then
seems he did his undergrad in engineering
How many problems per chapter?
Some textbooks have like 60 😂
My cal textbook has like 60 problems
spivak feels slightly awkward since he completely omits any topology in favor of epsilons and deltas
Ye true
In a 60 problem per chapter textbook most of them are too easy
I never did more than like 12
Cuz it was way too easy
the amount varies throughout apostol, and they follow ends of sections rather than being at the end of every chapter
Yea. The linear book im getting has 12 per section. Lots of proofs very little computation
as mentioned earlier, this actually fits nicely with how analysis is taught in the UK (at least in my school)
Zorich is an even better fit than Spivak though because of the ordering of material
which linear algebra book out of interest? Apostol actually covers a decent amount at the end of his first volume
have you got a syllabus following zorich?
or a course webpage
nothing public I'm afraid
one that tells which problems from the book should be done is especially appreciated
courses in the UK don't tend to set problems from the book either (even if some are sometimes lifted)
everything I had was assigned as a problem sheet without references, book were just suggested as supplemental
Are you UK?
yeah I am
Which uni? (if you don't mind me asking)
That's a good uni... U first or second year?
starting third
Can anyone recommend a book which is about the mathematical background of models in machine learning? Or a book that is about going thru the process of building out a model and describe its mathematical background?
Not bad, last year!
I'm on the 4 year course (integrated masters) 
Yeah I know this, havent read it. I might overcomplicate it and should read this first I suppose
These are really good as well
measure theory, galois theory, manifolds, functional analysis I, galois theory, geometry of curves and surfaces, algebraic topology, advanced real analysis, functional analysis II I think 
still can change some
what would advanced real analysis cover?
Are you a programmer by any chance? Or may I ask that what are you planning to use this knowledge for?
Why would you need that for programming
here's the syllabus:
Aims:
Setting up a rigorous calculus of rough objects, such as distributions.
Studying the boundedness of singular integrals and their applications.
Understanding the scaling properties of inequalities.
Defining Sobolev spaces using the Fourier Transform and the connections between the decay of the Fourier Transform and the regularity of functions.Outline:
Distributions on Euclidean space.
Tempered distributions and Fourier transforms.
Singular integral operators and Calderon-Zygmund theory.
Theory of Fourier multipliers.
Littlewood-Paley theory.
not really at all lol
I haven't enjoyed the programming I've done much
It's boring af isn't it
Ohh okay, my apologies then 🙂
😄
no worries
Idk why they make it compulsory
that's an interesting point
it was imo lol
yeah I'm not sure either, in my experience it's not worthwhile for those who can already program and doesn't seem to help those who can't much
My feelings also
Which is better;
-
T. Y. Lam: A first course in noncommutative rings, Springer, 1991.
-
T. Y. Lam: Lectures on modules and rings, Springer, 1999.
I agree with this though.
i'm interested in working with proof assistants like lean, but yeah i didn't enjoy my programming classes
basic programming skills are usually better developed through self tuition imo, at least compared to the way programming modules are taught by maths departments in particular
I'm curious if it's taught better within CS departments, but the best CS students I personally know did also have extensive experience programming prior to uni 
Well there's more to cs than just programming
oh definitely, I was thinking more in their 1st year or so
Programming itself doesn't seem very fun or interesting, but some of the theoretical cs classes seem more fun
ye same, usually people who care already know..
I've been given the impression by people at my uni that you can choose options to pursue either a more theoretical course or a more software engineering style one

If you're going to college to learn how to code, you are actually just wasting money for no reason
mfw the cs theory classes are gated behind the programming ones
true
best case scenario u go there so that HR says this guy has a degree
let him go to the technical interview
could just get a coding certificate at one of those coding bootcamps instead
true
but if u actually want to get into the fun stuff it opens doors
like doing a master at math
provided u study the necessary requirements by urself
Hello guys,
I'm studying Further Pure 1 at Further Maths A Level does anyone have any reccomendations on books that will support me in deepening my knowledge other than the textbook of course
Most books other than course textbooks won't really match the syllabus of the A level exactly, so if you have specific topics you want to go deeper on that would be helpful to know
I need to deepen my knowledge on Vectors:
•Vector Products
•The Scalar Triple Product
•And the application of vectors to 3D Geometry including ( points lines and planes)
Hmm for topics like these I would probably consult the linear algebra section of a vector calculus book - maybe something like chapter 1 of Hubbard/Hubbard's Vector Calculus, Linear Algebra and Differential Forms or chapter 1 of Colley's Vector Calculus
If you just want more practice at a slightly higher level on these topics you could check out the Old A-Level books by bostock and chandler
okie dokie
Khan academy probably has some resources on vectors
khan academy would be another good resource but I doubt it would go deeper than the textbook
it's hard to think of resources that will go particularly deep on those topics without introducing a lot of surplus material though 
Oh dam :(
Trying to make this question coherent:
Is there a good resource that explains a tensor from a maths perspective? Online, I keep finding physics representations and arrows, etc. Those are useful, but I'm wanting to understand the maths perspective.
I haven't taken linear algebra yet, so it might be impossible without that background.
I'm not looking for a total treatment of tensors, just a chapter or less that describes the basics. A video is also fine if it's mathematical.
should probably learn linear algebra first
Do you think the basics of a tensor would be unapproachable without it? Pretty much just want the definition/explanation of the simplest tensor (3d) in a form that I can understand.
If not, then I'll just grab a linear algebra textbook
I mean, tensors in the mathematical sense are just multilinear maps, I don't see how that makes sense to anyone that doesn't know linear algebra
Alright, thanks 🙂
you'll need to know linalg for pretty much everything anyway
this is mileti's course webpage for measure theory. however, i didn't post this because of his measure theory notes (although i found a new reference for measure theory to investigate), but because i found some high quality notes on single-variable real analysis which follows abbott to an extent.
looking for a multivariable calc book to supplement my school workload - it's junior year HS so id rather not have something TOO rigorous
having trouble deciding bewteen multivariable calculus by larson, calc of several variables by edwards, and calc on manifolds by spivak
i cant tell if spivak is rigorous or not
ive heard his name a lot before tho
The Spivak book is not well-written in my opinion
oh why not :(
It's just very brief, I think it's fine if you already know the subject.
ohh i dont want brief 😅
I have a recommendation for you
OK I found it. I used these notes to review multivariable calculus several years ago: https://www.math.cmu.edu/~gautam/sj/teaching/2017-18/268-multid-calc/pdfs/canez-calculus.pdf
HOLY SHIT THANKS MAN
You're welcome, but I think you need to have the notes from the previous quarter too, since it says "We have already seen what it means for a function Rn → Rm to be continuous, by taking any of the versions of continuity we had for functions between metric spaces last quarter and specializing them to the Euclidean metric."
oh ...
alr thats fine
Here, I found all three quarters for you: https://sites.math.northwestern.edu/~scanez/courses/320/notes.php
"Math 320-3" is the one I showed you above
So you can refer to "Math 320-2" and "Math 320-1" as you need
northwestern -> cmu? how does that work
I think he got a job at Northwestern after CMU
At the time, he didn't have 320-1 nor 320-2 up, I wish I'd had these back when I was reading 320-3
based on what you said, definitely don't bother with spivak's calculus on manifolds
More peach
you could try Colley's Vector Calculus, or for some texts a bit harder going I'd suggest Hubbard and Hubbard's "Vector Calculus, Linear Algebra and Differential Forms" or Callahan's "Advanced Calculus: A Geometric View"
Spivak has a textbook for single variable calc just called "Calculus" that's pretty much an analysis book, it would be extremely good to work through if you are thinking of study maths at university
what are some good resources to learn programming on my own? i took a couple of programming classes in college through the cs department but i didn't enjoy any of them.
depends on your objectived
objectives*
i suggest using Microsoft documentation for c# and going from there
"but i didn't enjoy any of them"
Can be a mood sometimes
I think the most important thing is to find anything that motivates you to do a lot of it and often
maybe check out project euler
I'm not massively fond of any intros to programming I've seen and it sounds like your courses would put you beyond those anyway?
idk, i had a course on object-oriented programming, which is really a course on how to write disciplined, readable code. it's probably useful but i didn't really pay attention

course desc:
Object oriented programming and design for large scale software. Class design, interfaces, inheritance, and polymorphism. Robust programming with exceptions, streams, iterators, and testing.
here's an older course desc:
Disciplined methods of design, coding and testing using the Java programming language. Topics include the structure and semantics of Java classes, data abstraction, encapsulation, cohesion, coupling, information hiding, object-oriented design, inheritance, interfaces, composition, delegation, polymorphism and design patterns.
maybe working in lean
it's a functional programming language so reading sicp might be helpful?
sicp is worth reading but pretty hardcore, one of my cs friends pressures everyone he knows to have a crack at it - you could check here if you are thinking of doing so https://teachyourselfcs.com/#programming
Does anyone have any good resources and lectures for matrix multiplication and linear estimation
I am looking for a good competition math problem book which starts easy then slowly get harder.
I have finished pre algebra and algebra 1, can you guys recommend me algebra 2 books that are easy to understand.
here is the good book https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
good book?
Can someone pls tell me what I'm learning in this course??
In Dutch (translated) it's called "Logic for computer science"
We have some predicates, functions
Transitive, equivalence relations...
Idk exactly, our professor ain't the best ngl
good book?
Dude you're literally spamming "good book"
Mb give more details
Crime and Punishment by Dostoevsky
you can find a newer one tho
What's the topic I'm learning called, if you know..?
Tnx btw!
Discrete math huh.. kk tnx
mathews problem solving tactics
Is there a reason Serge Lang's Basic Mathematics is pretty much only sold new or maybe like 5% off for used copies? I swear it's an older book.
Usually older books you can find them for 50-60 percent off
used at least
Best ways you can learn algebra-pre-calculus online
I just like the book/style.
I think it was originally published in 1988. if that's "older" to you lol
I just mean that there should be "older" copies of the book. I can definitely find plenty of textbooks published in 1988 for 50% off for used copies.
I wonder if it's because Lang passed away.
I don't know. I got it 50% when Springer had a sale awhile back. you can try bookfinder.com to see if you can find it cheaper
Thanks 🙂
Ukmt topic books ("Intro to...") do this and start at a lower level than Problem Solving Tactics imo. Problem Solving Tactics is good if you have at least a bit of competiton experience and at that point is probably the best general book. Possibly you could check out PST first and if it seems hard have a look at some UKMT stuff. You can also look at the handouts by Everaise which are close in spirit to the AoPS volume I and II books, targetting amc and aime level stuff
There are some parts of tolstov’s fourier series I don’t quite like in terms of exposition. It does feel a bit weird at times. I am going to consider another book I haven’t looked at in my collection before i decide jumping into Folland’s Fourier analysis.
Seems like Tolstov has some pretty weird notation and there are parts where some important rigor gets skipped over and some points feel confusing and misleading
I’ve managed to come across these texts so maybe I’ll trial by fire working through them to see which one feels like a good fit… not sure anyone has heard of these
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0471292885
https://www.amazon.com/Fourier-Boundary-Value-Problems-Churchill/dp/007803597X
A complete and balanced account of communication theory, providing an understanding of both Fourier analysis (and the concepts associated with linear systems) and the characterization of such systems by mathematical operators. Presents applications of the theories to the diffraction of optical wa...
Of course I think I might just jump into this book cuz a few people been telling me to go through it at this point https://www.amazon.com/dp/0470458364
And I liked the first 4 chapters of his functional analysis book but once it got to the spectral theory chapters, it got too heavy for me with the rigor
Looking for books like "Primes of the form x^2+ny^2" for algebraic NT (could be CFT, Iwasawa theory, etc.) that very cohesively develop material to solve a problem
but not looking for books that teach all the basic of ANT.. so no Neukrich or anything like that
Introduction to cyclotomic fields is a very good book that talks about iwasawa theory
It requires a lot of alg NT knowledge
Tho
preface says that it only assumes a first course in alg nt?
I don't trust prefaces
It requires you to know CFT and just generally to have intuition about ANT since the book is quite terse
I see
it'll randomly just throw out like
Let H/K be the maximal unramified abelian extension of K and it's well known that Gal(H/K) is isomorphic to the ideal class group of K
Can you guys recommend me a math book I have completed algebra 1 I need to study algebra 2, my final goal is to learn calculus for physics so that I can get started with physics
Hi! I’m a first year physics student trying to understand statistics and probability, along with its applications. Is this a good book? Thx
Or any other recommendations would also be helpful XD
Can I dm you
Can I dm you
Of course
probably the best probability resource for understanding probability
less sure about statistics
i used wackerly, mendenhall, and scheaffer
OK thx!
I have an old copy of AEM. It's very comprehensive but it's designed for engineers and scientists, so I wouldn't say that rigor is the focus
Does someone know about Stephen Willard's book "General topology"? How does it compare to other standard books like Munkres?
I’m just saying I went through his functional analysis book and I really enjoyed the first 4 chapters but I haven’t gone through his engineering math book
But at this point it seems like multiple people have suggested to work through his engineering math book and I’m just going to take that suggestion to heart at this point instead of randomly selecting another text before I work through folland and see if it works out for me, only to be disappointed again with too little or too much rigor
Tolstov started out promising but very quickly toward the end of the first chapter seemed to fall off a cliff and the exposition got very awkward
This book might be a bit tough for a very first look. For probability you can check out Blitzstein & Hwang. For (mathematical) statistics, there's Hogg-McKean-Craig, or Wackerly-Mendenhall-Schaefer (I think are the authors), or Larsen & Marx. The latter is a bit more "applied"
Depending on what you've learned before, a lot of it might be review. For instance, there's a few chapters that basically cover Calc. 3
So I should jump right to the Fourier stuff or just go through the review of what he covers?
I would prefer to go into a Fourier series focused book I have an idea of a text that I peaked at that seems interesting but I would rather go through folland first but I feel like I may need a pretext to prepare for folland
It’s weird cuz I’ve went through Folland’s measure theory heavy focused analysis book which I managed to work through with limitations but I enjoyed going through it
There's Fourier stuff in AEM. I can't comment on it due to general ignorance of Fourier analysis
I guess Fourier series is just a whole beast of complexity and maybe there is stuff I did not cover well to prepare going through a Fourier series text cuz I already struggled too much to work through two books so far… Stein shackarki and Tolstov so maybe I’m missing fundamentals or something
But Tolstov just seemed like it lacked thoroughness althogether. Idk why people would recommend that book. Extremely awkward notation and weird exposition
Well I liked the Fourier transformation chapter in Folland’s real analysis but I feel like it lacked more broken down exposition
Like I feel like there were so many missing pieces even though it was well worded
Like definitely was not enough to grasp the depth of Fourier series
Looking through the old edition I have, I would describe the treatment as abbreviated in AEM, so not some with a lot exposition
I think maybe it’s worth trying to work through Folland’s Fourier analysis text if I enjoyed his real analysis text. I don’t know. Maybe I just am limited in really grasping the depth of Fourier series past transformations and I may have to accept that
And it seems a lot of people really struggle with it and it’s not just me
Like it’s just really wild and my brain breaks over it
Or maybe I should just go the Ergodic theory route of dynamical systems since that’s the area of math that seems to make sense to me and it might come together that way
Different strokes for different folks sort of thing
Cuz Ergodic theory comes back to understanding patterns again and possible paths
Maybe it’s just more fundamental than Fourier series
Hopefully someone has advice. I don't have any good resources on Harmonic Analysis
Yea that shit is so fucking complicated to understand I feel like maybe I should just keep pursuing the dynamical systems/complex systems route. There are some more fundamental representation theory books that I haven’t worked through yet that maybe I should also work through that are not too rigor heavy. I’m considering giving them a chance as well but maybe the problem with Fourier series is the perspective of it that does not align with my reasoning
And it seems Ergodic theory does seem more fundamental to understanding symmetry and symmetry breaking and that’s more purely focused on dynamical systems than Fourier series
Maybe the problem is I shouldn’t be too hung up on it. There are some key things I am able to understand but the absolute depth of it seems to be a wall to how I can reason about it purely going the route of Fourier series analysis
There are certain areas of math that don’t seem to play nice with me usually in terms of material I’ve found. Representation theory/spectral theory being another problem area for me. But there are about a dozen more books I haven’t tried yet so I’m not giving up on that.
But I think I’m going to take a break from trying to grasp Fourier series more directly and go back to studying dynamical/complex systems more directly for sure. However before I do that, I’m going to go through some of those representation theory books or perspective focused books that I haven’t given a chance yet
After all… a couple of models for my work is focused on being able to more properly put together spectral graphs so… I should spend a little more time in the territory of representations
What's the book with the most clear explanations that you have read, trying not to pick the one you're most proud of reading?
(math books)
For me it's WWSawyer books
Almost no one knows him here though, may be better known in other less technical areas
Prob+Stats intros
https://www.utstat.toronto.edu/mikevans/jeffrosenthal/
https://ipsur.org/
Let me know if you need help with compiling a version of ipsur
Sadly I already know of this book.. But you know what I've never read it so I'll give it a go.. Thanks!
Hi, around summer i asked for differential geometry resources here for a first course here. Last tuesday my differential geometry professor recommended these books:
``Elementary Differential Geometry by Andrew Pressley, 2nd Edition Springer (2012)
Differential Geometry of curves and surfaces by manfedo P. Do Carmo (1976)
Elementary Differential Geometry, Barret O' Neill Academic Press INC. (1966)``
First lecture was based around definition of Affine Spaces and properties of an affine space.
based on the given recommendations here and the recommendations my professor gave, which one is best to complete first before starting to others? (i've been trying to look for affine spaces on the given books but couldnt find it)
Honestly, I would say reading do carmo's curves and surfaces book is completely useless
Pressley looks pretty good, and I know O'Neill is a good writer from his semiriemannian geometry book
Pressleys book is lovely
Can anyone recommend a good fiction maths book? I'm thinking something like Flatland. I've seen a couple of romance books, but not really interested in that genre. It doesn't literally have to be like flatland (fourth walling, people are literally shapes, etc.).
don't know if it's "good" since i've never read it
I'll take a look at it, thanks
greg egan's stuff, though it often includes physics too
That's fine with me. Anyone who doesn't like physics is dead inside. I'll check it out too 🙂
try Nassim taleb
he has some novels
any good documentaries/books on the history of math? (nothing too controversial)
from:sour_drop in:book-recommendations history
Recommendations for basic geometry book?
Harold Jacob's Geometry, Kiselev's Geometry, AoPS Geometry cover a good spectrum of difficulties and uses
although I am told the third edition of Jacob's geometry is worse than the earlier ones (I am familiar with the 1st)
Can you provide me link or pdf
against the rules

basic Algebra as in college algebra or abstract algebra?
Probably the former. Use occam's razor
Although he is advanced now that I look at it so maybe it is the latter
Inconclusive
Anyway I stand by my first message, if it were abstract algebra he would specify it since he knows that algebra by itself is an ambiguous term and if he wasn't aware of other algebras he would not have specified it, as he did, because he wasn't aware. Lastly, he said basic algebra which could only mean elementary. In all cases the conclusion is elementary algebra and not abstract algebra by pure reasoning alone.
Although phenomena may be deceptive so who knows, I might be completely wrong still
over analyzing wont help just wait for the answer
This is what i always end up doing tbh
look here
(“free textbooks online” is not pirating, they literally write their own textbooks and publish them for free)

