Books everyone recommends, but no one reads

File: bible-03.jpg (36KB, 800x451px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 800x451px

/sci/ really could learn a thing or two

Clayden for organic chemistry

>>8637099

Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs

>>8637099
I read Rudin. Ok, maybe not the whole thing.

File: download (1).jpg (8KB, 191x264px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 191x264px

>>8637099

File: 23453.jpg (15KB, 253x400px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 253x400px

>>8637099
I really enjoyed this book

>>8637113
I want to read them, but I would have to stop reading anything else.

>>8637099
Pretty much all math majors read Rudin at least partially because at the majority of places you can't take a math degree without using it for at minimum a semester.

Hoffman-Kunze is a better example of that I think

>>8637113
Came here to post this.

Tfw I've read two books mentioned so far cover-to-cover. BTFO

>>8637224
which ones? i've ready every book posted so far cover-to-cover so i can test your knowledge

>>8637224
Rudin and the Bible? Or was it algorithms and the Bible?

https://libraryofbabel.info/
Pretty sure nobody's really read the entire thing. Pretty sure anyway ....

>>8637292
This is true. I didn't get this book until after I already learned most of everything in it.

It is a great reference, but I never liked it for trying to straight up read through and learn from.

>>8637099
I read Rudin up to the Lebesgue part.
The book's great.

>>8637106
> the Bible
> not the Greeks

>>8637099
every single book by K. Marx

>>8637124
I read it several times

>>8637113
true
>>8637099
Slightly true
>>8637122
not true
>>8637124
not true

>>8637099
What's that big programming book that the smart guy wrote and if anyone says he or she has worked through it the smart guy says that person is a fucking liar

>>8637484

nvm thread got it covered

>>8637113

Calculus by Michael Spivak

>>8637106
I read a chapter a day. Never recommend it because the average fedora on /sci/ is on the fastrack to hell and is what is known as a "reprobate".

>>8637695
Prove god is real.

>>8637716

>>8622719
>>8622719
>>8622719

>>8637723
bullshit

>muh mathematical argument

even thatrests on a philosophical base.

Explain the philosophical base.

>>8637732
just an observation here, but you sound reallllly angry about something. is it about your lost soul or your inability to understand modal logic?

>>8637742
>but you sound reallllly angry about something
really?
wew

probably was that "bullshit" at the start

>>8637633
True

>>8637099
Have you actually skim Baby Rudin? It's really very straightforward. The difficulty of the book comes from the exercises.

Spivak is the one everyone pretends to read.

>>8637745
>bullshit at the start
what? about how I never recommend it to fedoras and reprobates? My opinion hasn't changed, I do not recommend it to you.

>>8637781
I meant the "bullshit" I literally wrote at the stat of my post here

>>8637732

Maybe that's what made you thik that I was angry.

>>8637783
No, what made me think you were angry was when you demanded I explain my religious beliefs to you, implying that I give a shit about you or your wretched soul. I still think you're mad btw.

>>8637113

I read the one about bitwise tricks and it was actually very informative

could not understand a large portion of it. Couldn't do any of the excersizes.

>>8637794
lmao

Don't post if you can't back up your claims.

>>8637292
Hartshorne is almost entirely lacking in actual intuitive motivation for algebraic geometry though. Good for use with an actual class to get insight as the problem are really good. Learning on your own would be a nightmare

>>8637760
No, not really? That was my first year calc book at the University of Toronto.

File: proofs.png (458KB, 830x2100px) Image search: [Google]

458KB, 830x2100px

>>8637716
You asked for it.

>>8637866
>Literally gave the most solid evidence for god's existence and you want a philosophical debate as if it matters more than the mathematics.

>>8637967
>>8637732

>>8637973
>>8637967
Atheists literally btfo on /sci/

That thread needs a sticky though until disproven.