number theory lectures

>>8390277
A lot of elementary number theory is covered in any algebra class that covers rings.

If you can't find suitable lectures, I suggest you start trying to learn from reading books. Many topics won't have any good lectures.

>>8390297
Got any recommendations for a book?

Though to be honest the reason I would prefer a lecture over textbooks is that I'm not used to the mathematical notation used in higher mathematics.

rebump

>>8390319
>I'm not used to the mathematical notation used in higher mathematics.

What do lecturers perform just orally and leave no exercise that require reading?

This looks like you have a problem different from the one you are trying to solve. Learn some notation nigga.

>>8392129
Where do i learn it tho senpai

File: chaika-eating.gif (3MB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 480x270px

>>8392138
Reading mathematical texts is probably the single most reasonable way to do that. Take an introductory book on abstract algebra. It should begin with some set theory, and those are amongst the most important symbols you will ever know. Later, when stuff like generators are introduced, the author will define notation for stuff like the ideal generated by a set. By doing this, you'll get familiar with some notation, group theory, ring theory, and eventually number theory.

File: cover.jpg (143KB, 500x489px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 500x489px

>>8392157
>introductory book on abstract algebra
Thanks, will look on Amazon. Do you know any good ones?

>>8392359
Pinter "A book of Abstract Algebra"

>>8390277
Here's André Weil's famous book on number theory. All free.
The prerequisites are very clearly stated, so that if you lack something, you know on which notions to catch up.

http://tomlr.free.fr/Math%E9matiques/Weil%20-%20Basic%20number%20theory%20(Springer)(338s).pdf

>>8392382
Thanks.
>>8392633
Thanks for the book, but I'm fresh out of high school so most of the terms discussed in the Prerequisites and Notations sections is complete Greek to me.

I did a bit of research online and found Number Theory (Dover) by Andrews to be easier to read. If that name rings the slightest of bells, what do you think of it?

>>8392857

WellI out of curiosity I had a look on archive.org, and this book looks like a proper textbook, written with clear pedagogical aims, with exercices and all. If you're out of highschool, that might be the "easiest" access to practical, basic works with numbers. It looks like a really clear book. Good layout.

However, if you are planning to study maths in the coming years, I'd like to suggest you read more topic-oriented stuff. For two reasons (and a half).

1) There will be redundancy between this textbook and your courses. This textbook might even lead you to unclear understandings, because even the prerequisites are not very hight, they still exist in this textbook.

2) Working on a text that has no clear "pedagogical" purpose is very fruitful activity. You're not being taken for a retard, the sentences have a real purpose, the theorems and lemmas actually serve the purpose of the book, which make them really exciting.

3) (personal point of view) The activity of exploring new territories of knowledge, untaught notions is exciting.

>>8393650
Thanks, I'll try using both then. I really like your reasons btw, spoken like a true mathematician.