Why does everyone shit-talk this book?

>>8403634
Because it doesn't teach you calculus

>>8403634
Because they failed calculus and blame it on the book by whining about how an introductory textbook for highschoolers isn't rigorous or abstract enough.

because they were the fedora tipper sitting in the back reading the spivak book and failing all the exams.

>>8405118
this desu, it sucks at abstract thought and makes many ppl hate math

Sci is full of contrarians. Stewart is a decent book, sure it aint rigorous, but mathematical rigour is for homosexual sperglords who possess not an iota of discerning 'intuition'.

Cause they expect their hand to be held throughout all of calculus via rote memorization of steps.

>>8403634
There are many better books in the rigorous, semi-rigorous, and conceptual categories.

>>8405140
As in this book is more abstract/ rigorous?
what do you guys think of

Calculus 10th Edition By Howard Anton
or
Elementary Analysis:The Theory of Calculus:Kenneth A. Ross

Do people actually read math textbooks? All u need is the exercise sets

>>8405181
This.

>>8405189
and that's what Stewarts is good for. Exercise sets and little reminders but as a self study you may need some other material to accompany it.

>>8405181
the retarded shit you do in your dumbass major isn't math

>>8403634
because the author is dead now

>>8405118
How do you fail calculus and also enjoy analysis?
Calculus is the easiest gen ed out there.
>>8405138
> intuition
> rigor
> not both

>>8405367
His spirit lives on in his violin.
Seriously his soul possessed it, currently 's on sabbatical leave.

/sci/ is full of freshman faggots who spend more time jerking off to the idea of advanced math than actually doing math.

Anything less than Spivak or Rudin is for brainlets, despite the fact they're barely passing their calc 1 class with Stewart. This frustrates them to no end and so they call it a shit book.

File: manga_guide_to_calculus.png (387KB, 492x650px) Image search: [Google]

387KB, 492x650px

>>8403634

Because it doesn't have chinese cartoons.

>>8405656
Is it actually good? I've been eyeing the linear algebra one.

>>8405140
>>8405138
>newfags spotted
Neither, sci prefer books like apostol, spivak and courant

Because, unlike with stewart, they actually teach you calculus instead of rote memorization, teach you to think abstractly, so can teach the basics of analysis and proofs, while also teaching you calculus.

>>8405426
>he thinks no calculus class uses spivak and no analysis class uses rudin
>doesn't think the professors don't recommend spivak and rudin over many other books
Spotted the freshman who can't understand a proof to save his life.

>>8406835

Honestly it isn't very good at teaching you calculus but the story isn't bad. It kind of abruptly jumps from the story parts to the math parts without the two tying in together very much, which it would need to do more if it were going to succeed in using an anime girl to trick you into learning things.

>>8406835
>>8406884

Then again, I haven't read it in a while and I've since learned calculus, so maybe it'll turn out better than I remember? I'm going to try to storytime it on /co/ in a few minutes after I finish downloading a new copy of it.

>>8406872
Mfw my calculus class years ago used Spivak and my analysis class now uses Rudin. I'm in meme'd math courses for fucks sake

>>8406867
>misusing greentext
>sci prefer books like apostol, spivak and courant
lurk more

>>8406867
How about Tao's book in comparison to those?

>>8403634
Because getting your generation to read a fucking textbook is like pulling teeth. The book is "shit" because students need an excuse for not RTFM.

>>8406923
Maybe it's you who should lurk more, otherwise you'd have seen those books recommended in pretty much every math book thread.

Or maybe you should have taken a look at the /sci/guide, which once again, also recommends them.

>>8406926
Never read it. so can't speak about it.

>>8406926
Tao's first book takes too long to get anywhere; he spends 100 pages constructing all the number systems. This is good after you've seen a lot of the main ideas of Analysis. His second one in the series is excellent.

File: mcalc-6.jpg (85KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 612x792px

>>8406835
>>8406884
>>8406909

OK, /co/ didn't let me teach them calculus, so I'm going to just post pages of Manga Guide to Calculus here.

File: mcalc-7.jpg (140KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 612x792px

>>8407007

File: mcalc-8.jpg (122KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 612x792px

>>8407009

File: mcalc-9.jpg (125KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 612x792px

>>8407010

File: mcalc-10.jpg (122KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 612x792px

>>8407012

File: mcalc-11.jpg (105KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 612x792px

>>8407014

File: mcalc-12.jpg (120KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 612x792px

>>8407016

File: mcalc-13.jpg (129KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 612x792px

>>8407019

File: mcalc-14.jpg (89KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 612x792px

>>8407022

>Well, you majored in the Humanties.
>Yes! That's true!-- I've studied literature since I was a junior in high school.
>You have a lot of catching up to do, then.

LIBERAL ARTS MAJORS ON SUICIDE WATCH

File: mcalc-15.jpg (120KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 612x792px

>>8407027

It's the premier resource for learning computational, non-proof based Calculus. Well written, cogent, and appeals to intuition.

Meaning it's the best Calculus book for the vast majority of college students. This triggers the autist.

File: mcalc-16.jpg (119KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 612x792px

>>8407028

File: mcalc-17.jpg (117KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 612x792px

>>8407034

File: mcalc-18.jpg (70KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 612x792px

>>8407037

File: mcalc-19.jpg (59KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 612x792px

>>8407042

File: mcalc-20.jpg (79KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 612x792px

>>8407044

File: mcalc-21.jpg (116KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 612x792px

>>8407045

File: mcalc-22.jpg (95KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 612x792px

>>8407047

File: mcalc-23.jpg (118KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 612x792px

>>8407049

File: mcalc-24.jpg (94KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 612x792px

>>8407051

>>8407007
>>8407009
>>8407010
>>8407012
>>8407014
>>8407016
>>8407019
>>8407022
>>8407027
Holy shit, this is worse than I expected. How can you learn from this retarded shit you weeb faggot?

File: mcalc-25.jpg (90KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 612x792px

>>8407053

File: mcalc-26.jpg (117KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 612x792px

>>8407055

Should I stop?

>>8407057

File: mcalc-27.jpg (88KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 612x792px

>>8407062

File: mcalc-28.jpg (107KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 612x792px

>>8407063

File: mcalc-29.jpg (117KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 612x792px

>>8407065

File: mcalc-30.jpg (109KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 612x792px

>>8407068

File: mcalc-31.jpg (83KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 612x792px

>>8407070

File: mcalc-32.jpg (112KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 612x792px

>>8407073

File: mcalc-33.jpg (71KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 612x792px

>>8407075

File: mcalc-34.jpg (63KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 612x792px

>>8407077

File: mcalc-35.jpg (104KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 612x792px

>>8407080

File: mcalc-36.jpg (111KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 612x792px

>>8407081

File: mcalc-37.jpg (116KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 612x792px

>>8407082

File: mcalc-38.jpg (104KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 612x792px

>>8407084

File: mcalc-39.jpg (84KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 612x792px

>>8407087

File: mcalc-40.jpg (131KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 612x792px

>>8407088

File: mcalc-41.jpg (132KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 612x792px

>>8407092

File: mcalc-42.jpg (119KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 612x792px

>>8407094

File: mcalc-43.jpg (127KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 612x792px

>>8407096

File: mcalc-44.jpg (73KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 612x792px

>>8407098

>>8407062
I kinda like it. Definitely doesn't look like it's going to come close to replacing anyone's textbook, but maybe it'll be good for some light reading before next semesters classes. Wish they had multi-variable calculus though

File: mcalc-45.jpg (77KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 612x792px

>>8407102

File: mcalc-46.jpg (45KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 612x792px

>>8407104

End of chapter, I'm going to get something to eat. I might post more later if anons want it.

>>8406952
>otherwise you'd have seen those books recommended in pretty much every math book thread.
Do you seriously believe anybody would recommend Rudin as someone's first exposure to analysis?

>Or maybe you should have taken a look at the /sci/guide, which once again, also recommends them.
Board memes also leak to the wiki and IRC channel....wow that really makes you think

>>8407122
> Rudin
probably wanna click a couple quotes up before jumping down someone's throat

>>8407127
>nitpicking this hard
it was fun shitposting I guess

>>8403634
Shit tier book. It doesnt teach real calculus. Also an expensive book. It is basically a meme. Whoever reads and uses it is a brainlet

>>8407122
>Do you seriously believe anybody would recommend Rudin as someone's first exposure to analysis?
Yes, do seriously think no analysis course uses rudin?

That's how it was for my analysis course, we started with rudin when dealing with the basics of analysis before branching of into general metric spaces and topological spaces.

>Board memes also leak to the wiki and IRC channel....wow that really makes you think
These books having been on the wiki's list of recommendations for years, hell the wiki itself has seen no updates since 2 years ago.

>>8407172
>Yes, do seriously think no analysis course uses rudin?
Introduction-level analysis uses Rudin? Litearlly where.

>These books having been on the wiki's list of recommendations for years, hell the wiki itself has seen no updates since 2 years ago.
Board memes also leak to the wiki and IRC channel....wow that really makes you think

>>8407177
>Introduction-level analysis uses Rudin? Litearlly where.
What is your notion of introduction level analysis? Calc 1?

http://mtm.ufsc.br/planos/2016-1/5316_Analise_I.pdf

Someone in this thread alone said they also use rudin for their analysis course.
Have you even tried to read rudin?

>Board memes also leak to the wiki and IRC channel....wow that really makes you think
If you look at the links provided in the guide, you will find the list to universities and other sites which list many professors recommendations for books, which, as you guessed it also contain these books.

if anything it's only recently that I've seen people against spivak or apostol, the consensus was always that they were the definite calculus books, rudin was a always a bit more divided.

>>8405368

>fail calc and also enjoy anal

They probably don't, they just say they do because they want to join the smart kids club.

>>8407028
This is terrible anon. I hope you didn't pay for this book.

>>8403634
Have you seen this monstrosity? Better off using it as a door stop.

>>8407282

>paying for books ever

ISHYGDDT, information isn't a commodity.

>>8406872

lol at trying so hard to sound smart that you misread that post

brainlets gonna brainlet

>>8407220
>What is your notion of introduction level analysis? Calc 1?
yeah

>>8407467
Well, in that case rudin is indeed way off.

By any do you do you live in europe? I remember some thread a few years ago where someone mentioned that around there (maybe cis region, can't remember), they just named the calc courses as analysis.
Maybe that is where the confusion is coming from.

>>8407177
I'm at UCLA and we're using Rudin for the "Honors" Real Analysis

What does /sci/ think of bass?

>>8407569
That's hass*

>>8407569

Drums are way better.

>>8407526
>at UCLA
>in honors real analysis
I was there a few years ago. First quarter wasn't so bad. Second quarter was ridiculous, especially if you're simultaneously taking honors algebra.
The class was 90% genius freshman from China, but even then things got so bad that the professor apologized to the classroom mid-quarter for pushing us so hard - "I just wanted to push you guys since you were doing so well. I hope I didn't discourage any of you. We'll push back this week's homework to next week." Apparently word had spread that he was giving us a heavier workload than the graduate courses there, and a couple of students contacted him about it.
But then he proceeded to give us a final that was easily the most difficult final I've ever had. It was way harder than the basic qualifying exam, which many of us had taken before the final.

>>8408374
I'm not doing the Honors Algebra till next year. I'm doing the second quarter honors analysis, honors complex analysis, and Diff. Geo. Already had a calculus on manifolds course so I'm expecting Diff Geo to be baby easy

>>8408374
Also was the basic qualifying exam hard? Is the Masters worth or apply to PhD programs?

>>8408383
With differential geometry there are usually two outcomes: Either the field is treated too lightly and is just an easy continuation of multivariable calculus, or it's dealt with properly and you drown in notation.
First quarter we used some crappy Springer text. Second quarter we used http://www.math.ucla.edu/%7Epetersen/DGnotes.pdf
They were quite different.

>>8408387
If you're not prepared to take it by spring, the university offers a bridge course for incoming graduate students that they would be happy to offer you. There's also a source of many exams with their solutions online somewhere. With all those resources, the BQE shouldn't be difficult.

You're going to have to define "worth it." What are you interested in? What would you be focusing on? If you're going for a master's degree in something related to applied mathematics, then it most definitely is "worth it" from an employment perspective. A master's in pure doesn't increase your employment options too much, but if you enjoy studying math and plan on pursuing it more later it could be "worth it". Regarding a PhD: I did some simple research with a professor who planned to leave soon. He was stressing out hard about his options since he had a wife and a kid. At one point, after some phone call he had to take in the middle of our team's meeting, he said that unless you're really really interested in research, you should not get a PhD. Maybe a master's, but definitely not a PhD. He then went on to say that, had he entered the industry after getting his bachelor's, he could be making a lot of money now and his family would have no issues. However, if he enters it now, he would be starting at the bottom rung of the ladder like everyone else.

Whatever path you choose, stay flexible. If you can't keep up with the pace of the classes you're taking, don't be afraid to drop one. The "departmental scholars" route isn't for everyone, and you shouldn't be ashamed if it isn't for you.

>>8407588
acoustic/fretless bass > drums > electric bass

>>8408374
Who'd you have for Complex Analysis

I had Chayes, fun guy

>>8408454
I took honors complex analysis before it was actually a course - they had it as one of the MATH190 courses or something like that. For that, I had Duke. Great guy. There are a couple of different approaches to teaching complex analysis; some of them focus almost entirely on the computational side of things, others will prove Goursat's theorem.

>>8408461
Yeah I'm in EE so I took a more computational one (I think it's two classes now, one is more applications based and the other is proofs)

>>8406835
does anyone have the regression analysis

>>8407569
Been playing for 6 years and have made decent money playing original music

So yeah electric bass is cool

>>8408421
Thanks for the advice anon. I don't wanna take their summer course got the Basic bc I can't afford to stay here. I'm thinking of self studying it and taking it right before fall quarter starts

Someone dumb really wanting to self-study Calculus should follow which route? Apostol/Courant for theory and Stewart for exercises?

>>8408667
If you're looking to self-study, Calculus: An Intuitive and Physical Approach by Kline is a fun way to start.

File: Ea4pRhz1Oas.jpg (128KB, 1006x1000px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 1006x1000px

I got the book PDF to learn vector calculus and remember most of my calculus background and you guys are making me feel bad now.

How do I get to the level of properly understanding books like Rudins, etc?

>>8405426
This.

>>8409365

pls respond

>>8409422
just do it, it's not easy

>>8409365
Read Rudin.
When you hit a brick wall work through it.
Read another analysis book, like Tao's or Pugh's.
Google things you don't understand
proofwiki is your friend.

File: yYdgLku0Tho.jpg (150KB, 686x1024px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 686x1024px

>>8409424

No nigga I mean that I was using Stewart to learn Calculus basics but now ya'll niggers are making me feel bad because you guys say its a bad book and that I am a brainlet because I dont go for the ultra rigorous approach.

Now I don't know what to do.

It's a good book. If you're going to take the Math GRE Subject Test, go through Stewart's.

Spivak's is good, but I have a note for all of you shitheads that think you are cool for touting Spivak. Spivak lives here in Montrose, in Houston, TX. If you don't believe me, check the location for his "publisher" (he self-publishes), it's on Waugh. I met with him and one of the questions I brought was with regards to this awful pretentiousness surrounding his book.

He said that you're all probably a bunch of assholes. No joke.

So quit being an asshole and recognize that Stewart's is good too, especially if you're focusing on Engineering and Computation.

>>8403634
Because they keep making new editions for a textbook covering subject that hasn't changed in the last 100 years and our professors expect us to get the latest edition.

Plus it's a fucking brick wall of text.

>>8409463
yeah man like reading is like to hard like give us that shit straight low key

>>8409428
follow a (lower division) calculus textbook through as best as you can. after that, pick up Velleman's How to Prove It. then pick up Hoffman and Kunzes' Linear Algebra. then pick up Rudin. Rudin should definitely not be your first exposure to calculus, nor your first exposure to rigorous proofs.

>>8406835
no

File: 20130820.png (239KB, 648x1480px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 648x1480px

>>8405656
>>8406835