How different will the contents of this book be from a modern

no difference since no advances have been made in mathematics since newton

>>8973058
Not true. Standard tools today might not have been standard back then, group theory for example and perhaps contour integration.

>>8973061
But within the confines of course material for multivariable calculus, intro statistics (except for the obvious computational advancements), and intro differential equations for engineers, has there been a change?

>>8973086
I'm not sure. Post contents page.

>>8973090
I will when I get home

>>8973058
Not true. Several Important Math topics came later, centuries after Newton.
Set Theory, Topology, Fourier Analysis, Tensors, Lebesgue Measure, Differential Geometry, Algebraic Geometry &tc

>>8973058
Bait

>>8973086
Newton didn't get to multivariate calculus or differential equations.
Also the formalism has changed greatly since Newton's time

>>8973967
What does this have to do with a textbook from the thirties?

>>8973086
>intro statistics
Yes of course. e.g. Fisher Informarmation - Cramer Rao bound, Blackwell etc., Rao–Blackwell–Kolmogorov theorem are some of the first things you learn in an introductory statistical inference class. These are early 20th century results and they most likely weren't in undergrad textbooks by 1940.

Statitistics were solidified in the early 20th century. Same for probability.

File: 20170613_193303.jpg (3MB, 4240x4552px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4240x4552px

>>8973090
Pic related

>>8974292
None of those were covered when I took intro to statistics.

>>8974402

>3 or 4 pages for each subject

Damm.

>>8974420
I can't tell if you think that's too much or too little.

>>8973902
I agree

>>8973046
I bought a lot of ancient maths books to read because they were so cheap and I ended up picking up a lot of old style notation, terminology and would use lemmas that were apparently bread and butter then but aren't taught so much anymore.

If you have a geriatric professor they might appreciate it.

>>8973058
No useful advances since Archimedes. Just mental masturbation.

>>8976539
this.

newton and co just finished archimedes thoughts with calculus. everything else would have been trivial to him. he advanced mathematics a century every year he lived.

>>8973046
Some definitions, mostly. You'll also get less algorithmic and more "tools for computation", like how to find the numbers of a square root yourself.
My 1970 textbook defines eigenvalues through the trace of a matrix.

>>8976669
Yeah, makes sense. It goes on for a while on solving cubics, for instance.