#book-recommendations
1 messages · Page 217 of 1
No that’s not true
No probably not. I’d do pinter
I think you should see some abstract algebra before topology anyway
And I think that someone intentionally doing topology before analysis might be procrastinating
Which is fair I would too
So instead of smth more tradition like riding
Rudin
I suggest Pinter AA
i did pinter aa then rudin and found that rly good

i migth get a copy of lee
finally
no more pdf
would motivate me to d o the extra stuff too
i love asking for textbooks for christmas
i usually ask for like
sock
but this year i asked for books and my family members are like
wow so smart
and i nod

wow big brain jesse
Recommendations for basic spectral theory?
What is spectral theory
@upbeat vine I don't know much spectral theory except for what happened in a functional analysis class
That said, there's a functional analysis book which seems really really good
"Functional Analysis, Spectral Theory, and Applications" by Einsiedler and Ward
I got my copy of knots & links the other day : D
how good is it to do the classical NT chapters of apostol then move onto ireland and rosen? I'm not sure how solid the treatment of analytic stuff is there
The analytic stuff in apostol is good
I prefer Terry Tao's 254A however, or Nick Anderson's Math 205A from like fall 2019?
Those are a good set of notes that are easier to read
I was thinking that the algebraic treatment is just generally more useful than going all the way through apostol without it
Can you DM me a link to those notes moon
Sure
Oh wait that’s NT
Yeah analytic NT
What are some good math books to get as a Christmas gift for someone? They are starting a math major next year
ask them if they're eyeing any textbooks in particular 
Pop-sci math stuff
Yeah, either get Dover or the Indian edition of some mainstream book. 
indian editions...
Cursed.
Don't blame me for the missing chapters.
back in my first year i ordered a copy of my linear algebra textbook
indian edition, $30
seemed like a good deal, yeah?
Darn you paid a lot
i opened it and some pages fell out, then i noticed the entire chapter on jordan forms was missing (which was also the unit we were on)
Was it Friedberg?
then i managed to get a good version of the book
ya
let me post my nice version
hardcover too 
Yeah, apparently Pearson is messing up with Indian edition.
Wiley does a good job, the printing usually sucks but at least the content is complete.
,rotate
obligatory size comparison with my favorite book 
That's the best buy I've ever made
wow thats cheap
it's not very big
I somehow always think Spivak's books must be encyclopaedic in size
his diffgeo series and calculus book are
I see.
but CoM is very CoMpact

idk yohan, read the heine borel part 
the best part of this book is the part where he says stokes' theorem is trivial
@fathom monolith "The same concrete approach has led us from cartesian closed categories, which are instrumental to build models of functional programming languages, to equational descriptions of cartesian closed categories. Functional programming languages can be compiled into a language of categorical combinators, whos phrases serve as code executed on a simple abstract machine, called the categorical abstract machine."
Categorical Combinators, Sequential Algorithms, and Functional Programming - Ebook written by P.-L. Curien. Read this book using Google Play Books app on your PC, android, iOS devices. Download for offline reading, highlight, bookmark or take notes while you read Categorical Combinators, Sequential Algorithms, and Functional Programming.
this one has all the CS math in it
why would someone buy an ebook when you can get it for free?
only 34 pages but also this is john mccarthy who invented lisp. this is a famous paper.
SICP https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/sicp/index.html
Is the go-to book w.r.t. formal programming languages
- It's free
What's your take on Strang versus Axler? Basically, the two books feature very different philosophies for linear algebra, which one do you like more?
Axler is better than strang
You can easily learn applied linear algebra, once you understand the theory
I still don't know if I should prefer the matrices-first approach or vector spaces-first approach to learning LA for the first time.
I wasn’t really a fan of Strang when I was more of a LA newb
I think Friedburg et al is a much better book, the applied book that is
But Lang intro to LA is the book I’ve been mostly reading for theory
Yeah, Friedberg looks good.
Yea there’s a ton of exercises in it
hey i want book reccs pls
I was told neukirch class field theory is good for class field theory
Do some matrix stuff first, honestly
Not a ton
But a little
Hmmm, should probably resume with Lay's book then.
What about linear equations?
It does start with linear equations lol
Then matrices and row reduction is presented as a way of solving those equations.
my first introduction to LA was through a DiffyQ and LA mixed textbook for a class of similar structure. The LA section starts by defining what a vector space is and then asking students to prove (aka just verify) if certain definitions of a vector space meet the criteria, and then it goes straight to sub spaces and then eigen values and if you dont know matrix operations then thats your problem.
This is by far the worst structure I have ever seen in my life for introducing it, very few students do well in the LA portion. So much so that the course will just wave that half of the course if you do bad.
I then took a senior level LA class this past semester through axlers book and it was pretty fun actually, and made my past confusion seem trivial.
Long story short Spaces are a bad starting place imo
LA and DE at the same time 
very common at engineering focused schools
what should you do first?
la

LA before calculus gang rise up
So is aluffi a good intro to cat theory
?
I like it, but others will say no
it won't be too heavy on it, just use the words and introduce them
it gets heavier only in the last 2 chapters
I like the book FWIW
What does that abbreviation mean?
for what it's worth
Oh
True
🎅
Well some people think that cat theory can be an introductory course for undergrads. I want to try that out and see where it will lead me..
Just because it is assumed that something might be the case doesn't mean it is. After all category theory is a different foundational theory.
Well I find use in that
it's hard to get that vibe because internet is full of a lot of cat theory memers
Haha
I don't want to sound condescending
I am just curious to see if I can learn cat theory and it is something I guess I want to undertake.
yeah idk about an entire course in cat theory
normally seems like you pick it up via other things
Yeah I have heard that a lot that it it is unmotivated to introduce cat theory to undergrads.
a course in cat theory will be very dry
I see more UGCT
?
Forsaken wants to be UGCT, I am judging him
hscgt
what's a ugct
I guess I need it for a conceptual scheme more so than a unifying theory although it tends to the latter as well.
oh
ug cat theist
Undergrad cat theorist
theist as short for theorist should be mandatory
Well I don't know why it is taboo:)
"what do you do
im an algebraic number theist"
model theist 
is it?
yes... CT is a nono
It's not taboo perse
I mean it seems so
pog my uh online college orientation thing starts in half an hour 😳
I'm really wondering if fall 2921 is gonna be in person
LOL I meant 2021
yeah jesse
cool
grats on acceptance B)
Thanks
I'm really thinking about gap year
Again, I have a friend who graduated last year, and is delaying till 2022
pmao
lmao*
yeah I did
also let's move to chill sully

math theist*
I'm an abstract nonsenser
In this video I go over two amazing books written by Terence Tao.The books are Analysis I and Analysis II.
These are the books on amazon
Analysis I: https://amzn.to/2T310oF
Analysis II: https://amzn.to/2SNpnI5
The links above are my affiliate links.
For more book reviews check out my playlist
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLO1y6V1SXjj...
the first book looks like a great calc II book actually
$45 on ebay
Yeah I'm mostly joking. I think books are good also in that their presence is looming
You look at your desk and see the book
oh yeah
you can be away from the computer
just you and the math
face off throw down mono-e-mono
Ok,You have some problems
Yeah the first half of his analysis I book seems like a good intro to proofs class tbh
all the stuff on sums but with proofs of why it converges
that is pretty popular in calc II I think
Yeah depends how proofy you like your calc ii
I'm actually interested in the difference of this stuff now. My uni offers like a 2 course sequence in analysis but they go over like banach spaces, normed spaces, and hilbert spaces, and then does like functional analysis. So how different is analysis ii by tao to that?
watch the video
Yeah I should do that lol
anyone have book recommendations for someone going to math grad school?
Just generally perhaps algebra or topology
im gonna start applying next year so
i got time
i just really want it so im trying to figure my shit out now
one of my advisors told be I needed to completely master linear algebra so i have been working on getting as strong as possible
What book do u guys currently read now?
I flunked highschool maths pretty bad so catching up
Honestly I probably wouldn't recommend this book though, its really dry 😩
Nice
Is it? Ahhh, i rather skip tho
There is a good book on trig if you want to practice problems a lot Kanoba
Its good, im learning! I just think the explanations could be better 😄 Quite often I'll find my self referring to khan academy an googling stuff
Forsaken I'll finish this book an probably buy some books on discrete math 🙂
No worries, I know theres a tonne of material online but I really get a good sense of a achievement when I get through a thick book heh
An because I work full time as a developer I dont mind having an excuse to get away from my screens
And the trigonometry book is called trig or treat
I know a nice pun
Haven't gone through it but it is good if you like thick books
who reads books fucking simps
Nice, good contribution to the discussion
your welcome just stop reading and do some man shit
like crossfit
ive fully read an entire chapter book
Cool man, well done
What industry u on?
I work as a VFX artist in the games industry 🙂
For one of Activision-Blizzard Subsidiaries
Crossfit exercise ur body, while book exercise ur mind
Ah, ok.
But I want to expand my skill base much more into programming an I failed highschool math real bad
😄
water gate NO REEL
Yeah this one
I'll add it to the pile 🙂
any good books for c#?
C#? You mean the language?
What else can it mean?
I mean why would ask on a math server
A curated list of links from the members of the Programming Discussions Discord server covering a wide variety of programming topics.
anyone know of any good introduction books or better yet notes for game theory?
I think I used osborne
It was pretty good
Lots of examples and pretty rigorous iirc

No, if you watched more video lecture series, you would have less time for the many books
I dont wanna read books
Good luck with life
Thanks
john conway invented game theory so maybe read conway
you don't like conway?
john conway thinks he invented game theory
if not him then who
This take is woke and everyone dunking on it is a fool
Lecture series are great
And often distill information far more efficiently than a textbook can
burn the books
lecture series are fine, but there aren't too many books in this world
lecture series are great even
it's just not perfect
neither are books
if the take was "we need more lecture series" not "we need not more books"
would've been less dunked
Aren't both the same people?
that's certainly a take
I hope that quarantine leads to a big explosion of online learning materials
From profs who don’t take down their lectures on YouTube and lots of recorded online conferences
There has been , but still cant find a good lecture series on class field theory 
I like lecture series which have accompanying notes and resources. They seem to be more valuable than just going through books or trying to use a random book alongside a lecture series.
the only video you need: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skD1_FaB1NU
If K/QQ_p is a finite extension, local class field theory tells us that the abelianization of its absolute galois group G_K ^{ab} is isomorphic to the profinite completion of the units in K. But wait there's more! One can reconstruct:
*the units of the residue field (completed)
*the units of the integers (completed)
Yeah, those poor auditory and kinesthetic learners
We have to force ourselves to read books
I prefer books
can't pay attention in lecture when it is really slow or I already know the subject matter
can't pause when it has something I need to check in a book
chalkboard drawings are prone to bad handwriting or errors
this is actually backed up by other books on mysticism
like 3 artists
one is a sculptor with the hands
one is a painter
one is a musician
but why
why are they different
why do they have a preference
why did each pick a different career
why not the same
Lol, I was joking about the learning styles
why not 3 painters 0 sculptors 0 musicians
you could argue that these different sensory pathways are like a weighted graph that shows bandwidth for each pathway
This is not quite true
and that the weights are not exactly the same for all individuals
There are people who find visual intuition essential and people who are medically incapable of visualization
I wouldn't say a lecture series online has the same benefits as actually going to a class. The main benefit imo in lecture series is I can focus on a lecture series for longer, because my concentration needs improving.
It explicitly does
For example it probably disproves your theory that there is an optimal method for every subject
It is
I think it is much harder to argue that there are no pedagogical consequences of such a discovery
It’s clearly false as you are stating it lol
Hell, there is so much evidence that for example people with ADHD learn better when they are more engaged actively
As opposed to straight lecture
The optimal method for a blind person to learn real analysis is to read baby rudin. Proof me wrong.
This is a far more conditional statement
Than the one you tried to make
I agree that self reported preferences are probably useless
PICTURE OF A CIRCLE
But it clearly does not argue that there is an optimal learning strategy
How one would even try to prove such a thing seems basically insurmountable to me anyway
It seems trivially false however
Plenty of people have legitimate neurodivergence
You literally said it
.
.
.
There’s a big difference between “self reported neuroscience is universally pretty bad”
it's just the globally optimal way of learning real analysis,
, just translate rudin to braille ez
If you translate rudin yourself I’d wager than you’d learn analysis pretty well
I don’t see how that’s a response to that
I think you are conflating “learning styles” with the fact that different people do indeed learn differently
Neurodivergence plays an important role in education
And people do in fact need different approaches
I agree that the traditional trio is probably useless. The reason I refer to it as self reported is that diagnosed medical conditions do in fact change things
And there is evidence to back it up esp in the case of eg adhd/autism
The main thing I disagreed with is “there is an optimal way to learn things” because it’s patently false
I was addressing a direct quote
He seems to think I misinterpreted that direct quote
But his interpretation makes no sense to me
Conflating that with an optimal method is inherently ableist
It’s not
One is a fact and the other is normative
It literally is
Try teaching social cues and subtle mannerisms to someone with autism the way a neurotypical person learns it
And you will see that
Okay try teaching sculpture to someone incapable of visualization the same way
Try teaching matrix algebra to someone with dyscalculia
Try teaching giving a lengthy lecture to a room full of people with adhd lol
Medically justified learning styles exist and are distinct from what you were arguing against. However the claim that learning can be optimized for the general population is patently false.
It’s not just a matter of phrasing
“Optimal” versus “optimal for neurotypical people” is an important distinction
The former is erasure
If that’s the case there was a misunderstanding given that literally interpreted that’s not what your words said lol
And I was responding mostly to @sweet lotus for his earlier comment
This is what the lengthy response was for
It’s not just word choice, it’s wrong.
If it was misinterpreted that’s different
Yes I agree with this. I understand what you were getting at now.
Sorry I misunderstood
In the math education course I took, we went over research that showed that people learned about the same amount using any of the three methods, despite them claiming to be specialized towards one of the three (tactile/kinesthetic, auditory, or visual)
Max brings up a fair point that people with differing learning abilities (ADHD, Autism, dyscalculia, dyslexia, etc.) have slightly different study patterns that optimize
I have ADHD/Dyscalculia/Dyslexia
The way I study usually doesn't work for most people, so I think Max is correct here
I've thought about getting on medication/treatment for ADHD, but I'm worried that I'd have to change my study habits and it can greatly impact my ability to get work done while we experiment with the correct dosage
What are your study habits
I usually intensely focus on a subject for several hours on end
So I'll go four or five hour sessions on PDEs or Knot Theory/geometric topology
This is detrimental to most students since you get diminishing returns on studying the same subject for over an hour and a half
There's some neuroscience research to back this up somewhere
See we agree on things Max!
I also think adhd meds for adults can cause really noticeable shifts in personality/mood
I had really severe depression that coincidentally ended right when I weaned off
And yes we do
Yea if you take meds don’t take amphetamines or eugeroics daily. Give yourself off days
Or it can mess with your sleep/mood/etc
Otoh don’t mess w your prescription unless you talk to a doctor
Some meds have nasty side effects if you stop taking them
I just stopped my ADHD meds cold turkery
and for about a month I felt like I had to throw up multiple times a day
I think I read that's a side effect
turns out amphetamines are you know, a drug
and you suffer withdrawal 
Damn that’s hard to do
Is it even worth it to start if I've never been on?
i started like 10 days ago or so maybe
tried it a bit and then stopped, now gonna talk to pediatrician and adjust
but i did see a glimmer of hope the first day
anyone have good recomms for lebesgue integs and measure theory?
introduction to measure theory and integration by ambrosio, de prato and mennucci
thxthx ill check it out
Have you actually read it? Lol, i don't mean that to sound offensive, but someone before just said it looked interesting so I'm curious if someone has actually read it and recommends it
all math books look interesting to me
is it good for self study?
i think so, i didn't always go to class and just used the book
since my teacher presented just the book content basically
Thanks
how do u guys feel about serge langs undergrad abstract algebra book 
im trying to find a good book to self study abstract algebra
oh yeah artin looked nice 
oh also what about lee's algebra book ?
is that any good ?
never read it, but I think d&f is really good for self study, a lot of examples, exercises and it's wordy, although some people don't like it
kk ill check it out to see if it like it or nah
I am some people
Maybe I'm just slow, but I felt like I was making no progress with df when I read it. And it's not like I wasn't understanding, it just took forever
What book did you use then
@dapper root I like aluffi now
lmao
im kind of sad i missed this online event where riehl was going to speak about her life/works-- it was on the 19th so i completely forgot about it
ooh thxthx
I have a question about learning fourier transform
what are the prerequisites
is it calc II?
or something else
Fourier stuff can have many flavours
I paid for these books but they are just a bit over my head
so it's kind of hard to say
I am studying discrete fourier transform and discrete time fourier transform
both
I need to know laplacian transform
but I guess I need calc II first?
or linear alg?
one thing that keeps messing me up is how to derive sin from $e^{ix}$
galois
you'd probably want calc II and lin alg
ok
like those are the bare basics, without them, you're kinda just learning formulas
is it just eulers formula?
for a deeper understanding, you'd start wanting complex analysis, and maybe even start delving into functional analysis
ohhhh 
as for this, it is just euler's formula
say I give you
a = x + y
b = x - y
can you find y in terms of a and b?
sure
it's doing that, but x = cos, y = sin, a = e^it, b = e^{-it}
don't get lost in the symbols, abstract it out to something you can understand at times
I guess because I never learned a lot of complex arithmetic
only basic angular frequency formula for electrical engineering
which is really just a subset of eulers formula
I did not go for EE I am CS
ohh I see
CS was cheaper
but I self study EE for 10 years
had some work related stuff for EE
ya, you'd want to probably learn complex analysis, at least the basics, I'd say
my EE library is bigger than my math library or my CS library
does tao's books do complex analysis?
I don't think so
I thought Gamelin was the standard Complex Anal. text
idk, around here I've seen Ahlfors used the most, but I did say "one of the" to make sure
but even if it isn't the most standard, I can attest to it being a good textbook
I have this that teaches complex arithmetic https://www.amazon.com/Art-Problem-Solving-Vol-Basics/dp/0977304566/
I need to really start from nothing
maybe then linear algebra
is there a lin alg book for complex numbers?
the DSP books say matrices are only used in state variable filters
so maybe I don't need lin alg?
I have this for filters https://www.amazon.com/Analog-Filter-Design-Van-Valkenburg/dp/0030592461/
never read the part on SVF
lin alg is just good to know, because it always just pops up randomly
it's often assumed to be like a baseline of math understanding
so even if not directly necessary
it's just a very good area of math to just be familiar with
but lets say maybe if I was in a hurry to code some fft stuff for a project for work
I don't really have time
so I would read complex analysis
if you just want to code it up, then you don't need much math at all, but to learn where the fft algorithm really comes from, lin alg is kinda necessary
ok
because the dft is often shown via a dft matrix
it's not very deep lin alg, mind you
but just being familiar with it is good
this book is about group theory, proofs, matrix multiplication
I'd say you'd want to learn lin alg separately, from skimming over the contents, that book is about abstract algebra APART from linear algebra
it specifically seems to be avoiding talking about vector spaces and modules
so I'd say they kinda expect you to know that from elsewhere?
I have 3blue1brown videos
watched them all
never worked out the examples myself
I understand determinants and change of basis
so doing ok?
try grabbing a lin alg textbook from somewhere, and work through exercises
in each chapter
see if you can do them
before reading the complex analysis?
if you can't, then it might be a good idea to review that content in the textbook
complex analysis doesn't really require lin alg no
lin alg is more like a mathematical maturity thing
I see
the questions in gamelin's CA is pretty hard i feel
fft is also related to e and logs though right?
so I should go back to calc books on logs?
and no i havent used LA while working thr the book
fft runtime complexity requires logs, and like any complex analysis with trig will force you to work with e^
elementary functions you should definitely be very comfortable with
manipulating functions containing e should all be in the calc books right?
usually in pre-calc
usually elementary functions are part of pre-calc
skipped a few chapters 👎
and are assumed knowledge for calc 1
you might want to look through basic mathematics by lang, to quickly catch up and refresh some things.
then, I'd go for learning calc 1 and 2
then, I'd try lin alg
and after, I'd go for complex analysis or other higher math (like abstract algebra)
this is the order I'd suggest for you
I am repeating calc 1
with the first three steps, you'll form a good enough mathematical basis, that you should get a good idea of where to go next
because precalc was so garbage at my school
what do u learn in precalc
they did not prepare us in precalc
I did
didn't know my exponent rules or trig identities
my calc 1 teacher skipped logs and e
I am pissed about that
< learn it on ur own?
exactly
I do everyday precalc self tests
on my own
I am going to pass calc 1 easy next time
memorizing all the theorems now
:) nice
well all the best to u
I would have gladly studying anything they told me to
but they didn't teach me anything
yup
smh i feel that studying is rly an individual task. a teacher's lesson can be enlightening and speed things up but it still depends on urself to learn the concepts.
I asked the teacher can you explain step by step what you did on the blackboard? he just skipped 5 steps didn't teach exponent rules writes the answer poof
precalc did not teach conjugate
I used wolfram alpha
and studied the calc book a lot
but none of the trig identities and exponent rules were in there
complete fail
teach did not understand my questions
didn't help
got tutoring from my school but that didn't help
help urself??
I didn't understand why I was failing
I thought I was stupid
or it was just hard stuff
I thought if I read the calc book more it will get easier
i feel sorry for u
well I hang out here and I can see where all the math books are
I won't be troubled by these things in the future
If you wanna help yourself
IMO the best resource for anything that comes before calculus is Khan Academy
so if you have those holes in your knowledge (like exponent/log rules, trig, etc)
go there
if you know that stuff honestly calc becomes so so so so much easier
cause in 99% of places as far as I can tell
calc is taught assuming you know all that stuff
YES
Can I has a chmkey nuggie pls
can someone recommend a good book on differencial equations for someone who is learning it for the first time?
do you want ODE or PDE?
I ordered this https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1615641823/
Im looking to buy myself a math history book for for christmas. I was looking at John Stillwells work, and wondering if anyone had read some of it?
te last one sounds interesting too though
this one is %50 math
even number chapters are mathy bits and odd are history about the life of rheiman
thanks kurt
Dr eulers fabulous formula talks a lot about the clothes the food the attitudes and the musical instruments they played
oh thats not my jive actually
very graphic
im interested in the development of math and maybe some fist fights along the way
tour of the calculus is about shit posting letters mathematicians send each other
my axiomatic set theory book and also maybe the rhiemann book talk about how dedekind went crazy and ended up in a mental institution because of the bullying that goes with peer review
hmm any prerequisites I should ensure I read up before I study classical chevalley groups?
terry tao's blog redirects here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_of_Lie_type
In mathematics, specifically in group theory, the phrase group of Lie type usually refers to finite groups that are closely related to the group of rational points of a reductive linear algebraic group with values in a finite field. The phrase group of Lie type does not have a widely accepted precise definition, but the important collection of f...
my guess would be complex analysis, group theory, lie algebra
but also I know nothing about chevalley till 5 mins ago
Has anyone read intersection homology by Kirwan?
or know of any good references on intersection homology and D-modules

Hi, does anyone know about de Méré problem on division of stakes. I'm reading an English book about history of math, but I am stuck at some parts. I'm not native in English.
Oh, it seems to be about probabilities and expected values
Basically you divide the pot based on the expected value of winnings for each player
@empty plaza
Ah, okay let's say it's best of 9 (but we finish at 9). Then first player is winning 5-1. Who wins?
Likewise if the game will end in a coin toss, then the pot should be split evenly.
Can you explain more on the "a certain sum belongs to him whether he wins or loses"?
My thought is that whoever wins should take all, but this seems a bit contradic.
try reading "a certain sum belongs to him whether he wins or loses [the games after he won 5-1 so far]"
Somehow I get it, but still not clear haha.
That certain sum does not necessarily of ratio 5:1 correct?
no, the ratio 5:1 is wrong, because in best of 9, even if the first player lost the last 3 games, the first player still won overall.
@empty plaza
Thanks, after a while I think I get it now.
That second rule should be placed first, it make the first easier to understand.
- If the scores are even, stakes should be divided in half.
- If situation guarantees a player always get some certain stakes, he would be guaranteed to received it.
Example: 80$
- By rule 1 : if (5;5) -> (40$,40$)
- if (5;4): two cases
- next game: (5,5) --> (40$,40$)
- next game: (6,5) --> (80$,0$)
=> By rule 2: First player always get at least 40$ (whether he win or loses the next game)
phatsp
I think the original papers by Goresky and MacPherson on IH are pretty accessible, albeit partially antiquated
for D-Modules, I don't really know
Mac Lane's Categories for the Working Mathematician, right?
hm, any specific recommendations, or will any intro texts do fine?
not sure... I could never really finish one
Lol relatable
How mathematically mature are you, Flick? If you haven't done a lot of higher level math, there is a free book 'Topology Without Tears' that is really detailed in its explanations (too much so if you already know a bit, but perfect if you don't). Otherwise, Munkres for topology
Topology Without Tears it is, then
Abstract Algebra, I haven't read it yet, but I've heard good things about Pinter for a first timer.
I have the mathematical maturity of someone who has no idea what mathematical maturity really is
But thanks, i'll look at those! :D
Okay, if you feel like you can't understand either of them, you may need to look at a proofs book to teach you how proofs work
wait, topology without tears is all in sans-serif \😩
if you want an abstract algebra textbook for the not so mathematically mature
gallian is decent
Pinter is even more beginner friendly imo.
I have a book recommendation. https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Analysis-Second-James-Kirkwood/dp/1577662326/
woops sorry that was not meant to be a reply
Oh, did you mean that for someone else or me?
I was just posting it to the chat
I accidentally replied to someone
not meant for anyone specifically
I just wanted to say that as a beginner I really liked how easy this book was
I never see anyone recommend it
Can anyone suggest me an introductory topology book?
Thoughts on Tao’s analysis 1 and 2? Do you think is somewhat appropriate to compare it to Rudin?
Check #books-old @grave egret
Munkres is real hard for me.
Is Rudin the book for analysis MoonBears
Having no background in proofs
@gray gazelle Linear algebra done right Textbook by Sheldon Axler
Baby rudin chapters 1 and 2.
@gray gazelle I suggest learning proofs and then using rudin.
Thats my personal suggestion.
@grave egret No just learn linear algebra that will teach you proofs
Like basis and stuff.
I don't even know what a basis is I read it and don't really understand it.
Seems straightforward
Try harder mate
5 mins. And another 5 mins reading the next part to see if I understand it.
You don't get to claim that you don't know the definition when the definition is right there. If you don't understand it, then just fucking memorize it
if you are trying to understand it in mins you are in one hell of a ride in the math journey
Oh.
it would help if the 93/552 thing wasn't hiding stuff
If you don't understand, memorize definitions, and the statements of theorems
It'll help build your understanding
That way, even if you're completely lost, you can scrounge something together on the exam
Maybe I'm too used to calculus, linear algebra and basic analysis.
One thing in math is you will inevitably hit a wall where it stops being "easy" to see
Where/when you hit this wall depends on the person
But if you continue in math, you will hit it
also you are given examples straight away
^_^
Upper bound being the millenium problems I guess
That's why I spent another 5 minutes seeing those.
If you can't do this with examples,I don't see how you would deal with algebra
Or higher math,in general
The thing is, last time I spent like 20 minutes understanding a theorem till I understood it, I discovered I had picked the wrong book.
That means you picked the right book
But as a broader point, texts in topology do suffer from extreme case of reductionism where definitions are invoked with less-to-none context
I had downloaded real and complex analysis instead of pma.
monkers
Yeah.
Dude, sorry to be that guy. Math requries patience. Five mins of each proof? no wonder why you did Rudin chapter 1 and 2 quickly
Okay. I didn't know that it was normal to spend longer on theorems.
@grave egret As per my experience, a lot of students skip the introductions or prefaces of math textbooks where ample amount of intuition is provided. Maybe you wanna check that out.
If you're just encountering new ideas
about 30 minute-1hr per page
Is a good rule of thumb
Yeah that is the usual suggestion as well. If less than 30-minutes is all you are spending, then you are definitely doing something wrong.
Okay.
Something I do sometimes is just go through the text and learn all the definitions/theorems
Then go try some exercises
Then if I can't do the exercises, I go learn the proof of the theorems
Maybe that's why I was unsuccessful when I tried to learn gal theory.
You might also wanna check out How to think about Analysis by Lara Alcock
@grave egret are you a high school or middle school student?
High school student.
Suggestion, try to relearn the basics book so from 93/552 go back to 1/552
I know it sucks but it will be worth it and your math matuirity will also happy too
This is something that confuses me about the books,
I must confess that I skipped chapter 1 because it was all very similar to most of what I've learnt in discrete math, set theory, other analysis books etc.
Yeah chapter 1 of Munkres just gives you the basic set theory needed for topology.
You should be able to understand what topological basis are without going through chapter 1, provided you know basic set theory.
Oh.
I'll try dedicating more time.
Nevermind bad analogy because the universal set is only 1.
So like all element must be in at least one basis
And the intersection of 2 of them contains another basis.
So once you are given a topology, which would be a collection of all open sets, it would sometimes be tedious to talk about a topology by talking about all of its open sets. So say if I want to check if the topology only has infinite open sets, it would be tedious to check if every open set is infinite. So what you want is something that you can handle a little easily but also gives you the complete information of the topology (compare GPS coordinates of your house versus the house address etc, both of them are sufficient to let you get to your destination, but one is easier to handle). This is what basis are for a topology. They are easier to describe and hence handle, but gives the total info about the open sets of a topology. Aka saying something "topological" about the basis is equivalent to saying something topological about all the open sets.
what is PMA?
Baby rudin; "principles of mathematical analysis"
i havent heard pma before tho
baby rudin
Yes baby rudin.
but there are three classical analysis books by rudin
my axiomatic set theory book talks about how there are different paradigms for set theory that are incompatible
I shit my pants
never heard of zermelo before
dont shit ur pants pls
imagine reading a book on set theory and not once being told that it is actually based on zermelo set theory
Wdym
like imagine learning the english language but never hearing the word "english" only the word "language"
then thinking there is only one language and also not even knowing the name of the language you speak
ok?
most mathematicians assume this (maybe the axiom of choice too) and it's consequences though so don't worry too much about it
its more like
most mathematicians dont care
zfc works as a framework so its used
if a problem was found in it, it'd be repaired, another letter would be added to zfc, and we'd move on with our lives
mathematicians dont really think about foundations much unless thats their specific area of research
zfc?
the zermelo-fraenkel set theoretic axioms together with choice.
so its less like not knowing about different versions of english, and more like not realizing that brits and americans spell "colo(u)r" differently
although even that isnt really accurate since
you actually have to think about spelling in your day-to-day life
most mathematicians dont need to think about foundations except perhaps to handwave "yeah oops these are actually classes not sets but w/e"
so perhaps it's more like not realizing that you aspirate your "p"s and "t"s
well you need to worry if you care about foundations
and a book on formal set theory certainly should touch on that
I thought that I would need to learn all the different ones
it makes me feel better that I can relax and not worry about ancient dead ends of math history
actually while we are on the subject I found some stuff on modern classical umbral calculus
is this a complete waste of time?
Do you know some really introductory good book about Module Theory?
I read your user as necrophilia

ya
d&f specifically has a little unit on modules
but it's a common thing to see
in a lot of abstract algebra texts
here's what's covered in d&f modules
if you wanna know
Wait that's not D&F's font
same lmao
probably a newer edition of D&F? I ordered one recently
it's the table of contents that show up in the sidebar of my pdf viewer
and this is not a thing apparently, checks out lol
d&f font is pretty well known it seems lol
everyone instantly realizes when it's not d&f font
Well I know D&F lol
not just you, it's been a couple of people lately that noticed that the screenshots I was sending was not d&f font
Ah
Do you even know algebra if you don't know the d&f font?
secret handshake of math
you can tell when a screenshot is out of d&f because it will be 90% text
with no space

jacobson
(see pinned message)
Any book recommendation for Data structures and algorithms??
CLRS
Could you me a name that I could libgen
Introduction to Algorithms is a book on computer programming by Thomas H. Cormen, Charles E. Leiserson, Ronald L. Rivest, and Clifford Stein. The book has been widely used as the textbook for algorithms courses at many universities and is commonly cited as a reference for algorithms in published papers, with over 10,000 citations documented on ...
Thanks
CLRS is very good
Y'all have thoughts on AOCP , Knuth's books?
I need to read Knuth's books
That alg book is legit incredible
even I've read CLRS and we don't study in english
if a guy computes, can we call him a computer
Any book recommendation for Data structures and algorithms??
Since CLRS was already stated, I'll throw in Algorithm Design by Kleinberg and Tardos
We already used to
maybe silberschatz for databases (at least i think it is better than the cow book)
We call them a Turing Machine
Well okay then, Finite State Automata it is

metal gear rising 
Nanomachines son

@fast portal hopcroft
karp
I started reading this https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Graph-Theory-Walker/dp/8120321421/
I seems to cover a lot for a first book on the subject
with an appendix for noobs and another appendix for advanced
nice notation guide in the beginning
Is basic high school math (no calculus) the only prerequisite needed to understand intro to linear algebra 5e by Gilbert strang ?
Yes
Would one need mathematical maturity to truly understand it?
Yeah, I got it to pair with the mit ocw course...
Many people take a more "applied" linear algebra course
Oh
Where Strang may not be useful
Are there any video lectures you’d recommend?
If you are in an applied course
3b1b's linear algebra series is fantastic
Not a set of courses, but an animated attempt to try to make the concepts natural. It pairs well with a book
Oh okay, so since I’d be missing out from some of the application by reading strang what other books or videos would you recommend as supplement
I tried khan academy but it seemed like a lot of stuff just wasn’t there
Nah Khan can do lin alg as well
I was suggesting the opposite, that strang might be too in depth. If you feel like you can still do it, why not?
oh okay, no I intend to go with the course
Oh nvm Strang is an applications book haha
For some reason I thought it wasn't
Yeah that is a good pairing
Np. Feel free to ask if you want anything else
3blue1brown is based

I remember learning LA using 3b1b it makes it so easy.
3b1b is great
if you are looking for an actual book id recommend lang
he has a couple go for the introduction to linear algebra if you are starting
i like books thats why id recommend it
I need to learn some surface level linear algebra over break
I'm doing a proof based lin alg course next sem and I know 0 linear algebra
Probably gonna grind khan academy and the 3b1b videos for a conceptual overview
what do you guys think of the textbook topology and geometry
by glen e bredon
i read uptill compactness and hausdorff spaces in simons
i wanna learn topology
is it good for atleast just the use of the first chapter to learn point-set?
it looks harder but is this an upshot that its harder or is that bad
it looks dense
and like hard hitting def thm style so what do u guys think
If you want to learn point set I recommend Hatcher’s notes or Topology: a categorical approach
Maybe both
I thought you liked Munkres
the thing is i learned about like half point set but then i noticed my textbook doesnt have quotient spaces
im missing out connectdness and thats it
should i keep going with tmy text and learn quotient spaces from outside
or
?
the motivation is to learn algebraic top
i am using hatchers notes as another source
already
I never liked minored
I used to think munkres was the best textbook
I changed my mind
what's the best now
Topology a categorical approach is very good imo
But I haven’t met anyone who used it as a first text
is it good for like a first course in it
So it’s hard for me to be too confident
But the pov is provides is ideal for doing math I care about
I see, I wanna delve into some topology at some point next year
And it’s way less dry
maybe I'll check it out
I think that it is at the very least a great companion to a more traditional approach to topology
So you can see why certain point set defns are the way they are
Like I think things like box v product topology make way more sense from the pov of universal mapping properties
hi hi
im currently reading needham's vca and he does some interesting stuff with cubics. what books do you recommend to go more in depth? (depressed cubics, vietes cosine formula, finding roots by intersection of x^3 and a line, etc)
for some1 who wants to do AT
and have no problems with the T part
how much topology should u know
or like up to what concepts
it's probably good for a second course or for review (I might use it for review myself soon), it's very short so it skims over important stuff. For a first course I'd use Topology Without Tears or the first few chapters of Munkres.
if a guy computes, can we call him a computer
I see, thanks!
computers were mostly women. true story. look it up.
the computer we talk about today was at that time referenced as automatic computers
so the first automatic computer programmers were both women
so when you say my computer is acting strange just check what year it is before you say something offensive
if time travel ever gets invented in the future
deel
idk why anyone would have wanted to be a computer
it was a shit job
That seems like a braindead job,ngl
at that time the wage gap was real
so it was an actual example of sexism
also 80 years ago
funny thing is though
they eventually became smarter than men
because they had access to computers
the men had all the money so it was an interesting case of guy with money doesn't know how to use a computer
thoughts on Taos analysis books?
my opinion so far is that they are well written and presented. well organized. beginner friendly.
and actually you will be wanting more when you get to the end
they are extremely on topic
Its nice reading, like its one of those books that you don't dread reading
Hmm
what about rudin's
I started Rudin, so far two proofs it's like he pulled things out of his (bleep) with no further explanation.
Is there pre-req for Rudin's?
Math maturity
that's not useful, I mean is there knowledge required to know before tackling Rudin?




