ITT: 0/10s.

I hate that book so much.

At least you didn't have to use Bretscher :,(

File: KnK.jpg (15KB, 330x499px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 330x499px

t r a s h

I learned more from Reif which is almost 60 years old at this point.

>>7954794
the only good physics books that exists are in eletrodynamics

>>7954800

I loved Griffiths' QM book and hated his EM one. It's funny when he makes fun of people who don't understand the material when you understand it but not when you don't. :(

>>7954809

Y E S

>>7954782
thats my favorite linear algebra text :(

>>7954809
>bad

Nigga be trippin'

>>7954792
>Bretscher
>Literally just a fucking magazine

Fuck Bretscher

Whatchu niggas think about Bourbaki?

>>7954782
>>7954785
What's bad about it? I've never read it.

>>7957586
probably worth reading but i always have a bias against older books due to outdated writing style, and in this case those books are translated as well, so even bigger bias against them

>>7957659
There's no reason to read Bourbaki.

>>7957663
that's sort of what i was thinking

it fascinates me that this group of guys sat around and rigorously worked all that shit out though

>>7957659
>not learning French just to get into Bourbaki

>>7957663
Why not?

Give explanations you cucks.

>>7957586
literal autism

>>7954782
Just YouTube Professor Gilbert Strang's linear algebra videos. He's excellent.

>>7954782
u wut m8 i'll fite u irl
Seriously though that's a book for people who have already had a semester or so learning introductory linear.

>>7957799
There's more to Linear Algebra than applied intro shit.

File: 51UNYLGZLNL._SX395_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (41KB, 397x499px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 397x499px

Why does this book exist

>>7958598
Fuck off dipshit

>>7958604
I don't know.

>>7958797
Light bathroom reading material for /sci/

ITT: Opinions

>>7957470
Why don't you like this book?

File: 0131816292.jpg (339KB, 475x648px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 475x648px

>>7954782
Too hard.

>>7954782
Linear Algebra Done Right is the bext linear algebra book I know of.

>>7957749
Brainlet detected.

>>7958598
Wow, edgy much fucktard?

>>7959070
Doesn't even go over matrices

>>7954809
>>7954819

Griffiths' book has been to most indications I've seen. What's so bad about it? What do you guys suggest?

>>7958598
Not knowing that Strang is a God in linear algebra...what are you 8 years old?

>>7959261
Yes it does.

>>7954782
What do you not like about HK?
If you're a physicist expcting some herpaderp matrix bullshit, and working without exception over the reals, then I get the bitch-ass whining, but otherwise I just don't see the problem with HK.

>>7958797
>I'm too retarded to understand it
>so it is bad

>>7959261
Yes it does.

>>7959066
Sort of. Look back on it in a year or two and be amazed by how great of a reference it is, though. Everything is so much easier.

>>7959342

But this is incorrect because Rudin is very, very easy to understand and complete and is also a very bad book.

>>7957663
>>7957668

my old school, preddy famous algebraist prof said it was nice every once in a while to have bourbaki around in case you need the most general form possible of some result to get you out of a pickle, but that was it.

>>7959334
there is no problem with it. it's a thoughtful and rigorous presentation of elementary linear algebra with a wealth of great exercises

>>7954794
THIS