Has anyone here read this? Any tips on reading through it?

What is your ultimate goal in accomplishing reading this book? honestly curious

>>9959854
While my interest lead me to the book (such as math, mathematical and philosophical history, and as of late: starting with the greeks), I haven't really asked myself what my ultimate goal is.

So, since you stresed the honesty, I will give this honest consideration. Given my interest, it should be clear it's to deepen my knowledge in the aforementioned subjects, but after reflecting on this question a bit I think a significant portion of it boils down to an attempt to gain a competitive advantage in math, as I'm completing a degree in that now and try to read texts outside the normal cirriculum to stay ahead.

Saying this, it sounds silly, as reading the elements clearly won't help moreso than any other modern day geometry text worth it's salt, and that could clearly be better spent doing something much more constructive to my 'resume', but reading John Stillwell's "Elements of Mathematics" birthed additional motivation in gaining the bigger picture of maths, and exploring the contributions from individual authors is fun and interesting.

So I don't know, that's a difficult question to answer but I hope I did well enough for you to get the jist.

>>9959907
I thought of beating myself with textbooks in my degree (Engineering) but found that to be useless. If you're dedicated in "staying ahead" why not create a dialogue between you and your professor, theyre the best resources to give insight by creating meaningful exchanges , something books cant offer you, My two cents

>>9959948
Waht dialogue can a professor offer that the internet cannot? I just don't really know what to say other than particular questions, often only prompted after exams.

>>9960036
>Waht dialogue can a professor offer that the internet cannot?

Seriously?

>>9959842
euclidea.xyz is a great free game, try it guyz

>>9959842
Geometry: Euclid and Beyond by Hartshorne is a good option and you'll learn a lot more too.

>>9959948
>engineering
that explains things

>>9960036
This is such an autodidact question it's difficult to know where to begin. How do you describe a colour?

File: download.jpg (7KB, 187x269px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 187x269px

>>9960036
this is insane. your professors are accomplished mathematicians, the internet is full of faceless morons. you will never talk to someone on the internet with the mathematical maturity of a math phD
ask ur professor what you can do to "gain a competitive advantage"
put down the elements, im sure its neat to flip through as a relic of our beginnings but it can't be a good use of your time
how far along your math degree are you? have you started abstract algebra and analysis yet?

pic related is the textbook i used in my introductory geometry course

>>9960727
As the particular object of sight

>>9959842
The geometric parts are entertaining.
The arithmetic is pure shit though. Mathematics before Viete were a nightmare.

>>9960755
this person is right OP

>>9960105
Yes.

>>9960697
Thanks I will after I respond to these professor-cucks.

>>9960721
Thanks.

>>9960727
I don't see how this compares to such a question.

>>9960755
Math overflow and math.stackexchange both have quality posts from solid mathematicians. Aside from that, many actual professors have already answered that question and it's all available online. I don't see how my particular professors advise would be so unique and special compared to the multitude of existing answers available.

And I'm not going to put down the elements, even if it doesn't help my math career much it's still a worthwhile read.

I have recently started both of those, but only on very introductory terms (on my own time, not as an enrolled and accredited student).

How's the geometry book anyway?

>>9963288
He's demonstrably wrong, actually.

>>9960721
Me again, just to say I actually have that geometry book on my wish list rn. Did you read anything alongside it, like the recommended text on Galileos Theory?

For what it's worth, I think it's great that OP is reading The Elements. People underestimate how insightful it can be to take a historical approach- to read what was once read by mathematicians for many hundreds of years, even up to relatively recent times. The Elements is a classic and an important part of mathematical history.

>>9964793
Until the 18th century it was the second most read book globally!

And I agree, I think the historical context can give deeper, bigger picture insights that are helpful if you really want to specialize in the field.

>>9959842

Your approach of skipping the annotations and only actually doing the actual problems/demonstrations is correct. As you know, /most of Heath's first volume is annotation which you really don't need to slog through/. Once you get into the next two they're more substantive/direct.

I strongly recommend "translating" each thing into modern terms - I did this with about 20 props recently, for my own purposes. Some of it is interesting, and much of it is "trivial" by modern terms, though the geometric demonstrations are still worthwhile. The benefit of knowing elementary algebra in today's language is that a lot of of the geometry can be recognized for the very simple observations that they really are, and a trained person can go "oh, of course, we knew that already, it didn't have to be nearly as hard/convoluted as he made it sound." The thing about ancient mathematics is that they did not have effective algebra, at all. Algebra was literally at a dead standstill in world history for about three thousand years until Cardano etc /finally/ started doing things more advanced than solving quadratics/ in the sixteenth century.

Let me give you an example about Book 2, prop 3: a writeup is HERE

http://www2.clarku.edu/~djoyce/elements/bookII/propII3.html

and my personal notes on the problem run thus:

Say you have this line segment and you cut it randomly somewhere. You use either one of the two smaller segments that you've just cut off, as the other side of a rectangle, together with the original line segment. Then this big rectangle is equal in area to two smaller rectangles, put together: the product of the two smaller segments, and the SQUARE of the first. Put algebraically, a(a+b) = a^2 + ab. 'Whoop-dee-doo", a modern says.' "

A really, really convoluted way of saying, in geometric terms, that a(a+b) = a^2 + ab. That's the whole substance of the problem. Easy. Simple.

>>9959842
Read a few chapters, gives you a good understanding of how to create geometric shapes, if you appreciate mathmatical understanding of logic and shapes this is a must read, but dont be afraid to scan read

>>9964708
in response to >>9960105
Professors spend many years becoming knowledgeable about a subject, they were once where you were, they know what works and what doesn't, as well as what is useful of certain ends. It's just a good option if your goal is really to gain an advantage and want to save yourself some time. The internet is usually full of people who are dumb or have no experience or both.

Now if you wanna announce to a bunch of strangers you're gonna read a thirteen volume book of geometry you're on the right track.