Thread replies: 15
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3
File: stewart.jpg (38KB, 410x500px) Image search:
[Google]
38KB, 410x500px
Calc II class (Integral Calculus for international bros )uses this shit tier textbook. Also l learned Calc I from the same textbook.
Can you guys recommend a more rigorous book I can use to supplement/ use alongside this book if I want a better, more advanced understanding of the material? I haven't had any sets/ proofs/ formal logic classes so don't just tell me "le prove everythings xDDD"
>>
I will start by saying that you could use Spivak even if you haven't had to prove anything. A book on proofs is not long, and you can pirate a professor's manual for Spivak's calculus with all the worked solutions.
You want a more rigorous book, well you can't have rigor without proofs, hell I would even say that's what rigor means.
If you don't want proofs, then there is literally nothing wrong about Stewart. Just do more exercises than asked and you'll be better than your classmates.
>>
>>8652874
What would you recommend as a starting book for proofs? The only things I've had to "prove" were showing epsilon-delta limits and showing trig expressions were the same.
>>
>>8652881
How to prove it
>>
>>8652861
Lang's A First Course in Calculus
>>
File: 41n44hi1ByL._SX350_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (32KB, 352x499px) Image search:
[Google]
32KB, 352x499px
>>
>>8652892
>A First Course in Memes
>rigorous
>>
>>
>>8652903
stop repeating.
Lang is a good book he can use it in conjunction with spivak's
>>
>>8652902
I've wanted to check this out for fun just because Spencer and Steenrod are gods if you work in geometry/topology. Is there anything especialy interesting (unique insights) about it or is it all standard?
>>
File: mspivakcalculus.jpg (89KB, 349x492px) Image search:
[Google]
89KB, 349x492px
>>8652861
Use Spivak. My ex-teacher used Stewart for my pre-calculus classes. It's a very basic book. Right now I'm cursing Calc I & II and we are using Spivak and Apostol, if my memory doesn't fail me. Spivak is all you need.
>>
>>
>>8655166
>http://4chan-science.wikia.com/wiki/Mathematics#Calculus
The topology and geometry sections of that page are absolutely atrocious,
>>
>>8656060
>The topology and geometry sections of that page are absolutely atrocious,
Why?
>>
>>8652861
Just use Laurent Schwartz's analyse book
Only brainlets say it's hard
Thread posts: 15
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3