Math Textbooks

File: stewart.jpg (41KB, 425x500px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 425x500px

Stewart here

File: af7fdd6cb3cedd879dd6b6054ab13118-d.jpg (19KB, 300x475px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 300x475px

is this one any good or should i get a different one? taking my first analysis next semester

>>8386455
>>8386640

Shitty book thread?

>>8386455

Is it good though? I was recommended this book for my DE course, but it never seems to get mentioned in textbook threads, and I am yet to find an electronic copy

I used the Boyce & DiPrima book when I took diff eq last semester.

>>8386654
>book used at Harvard
>shitty
pick one retard

>>8386658
The book is OK, I have a copy if you're interested. Post a email

>>8386677

I would appreciate a cop; here is a throwaway: [email protected]

Have you used any other DE books/how does it compare to others?

>>8386455
I rate this book a 5/10

It was alright

File: 51a3jKE3jSL._SX340_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (41KB, 342x499px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 342x499px

>>8386455
Better book coming through

>>8386725
Sent; book was OK, best off learning from multiple sources.

>>8386652
Someone has references to this material?

File: frogman.jpg (2MB, 6000x5606px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 6000x5606px

someone recommend me a good source on abelian varieties

>not using ODE by William A. Adkins and Mark G. Davidson

topkek!

>>8386652
Pugh is the best analysis book, but I've spent hours filling in holes in his proofs.
So I recommend supplementing his text with Rudin or Tao's books.

File: pepe_plane.gif (2MB, 400x332px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x332px

>>8386668
>"It's used at a prestigious school, so it must be good!"

>he thinks the kids who are accepted into Harvard are actually smart, and not just rich and lucky

>>8387207
Have you checked the references on the nLab page for abelian varieties? I heard Hartsthorne is good, but I don't know whether he goes over abelian varieties or not.

File: pepe18.jpg (59KB, 500x499px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 500x499px

>>8387267
Checking them out, Mumford might be a solid option. I was just hoping to avoid Milne and Lang mostly/especially wondering if there were any nice 'more modern' sources

>>8387277
For modern sources, nLab should have the best references. They always seem to try to find the most "progressive" work to base things off of. Sorry I can't offer any specific titles really; I'm still trying to find my own rhythm with algebraic geometry. Good luck anon!