Analysis is gay

>>9000629
>Should I do less problems?
No.

>>9000629
Go slower and make sure you really understand the material. You can't just race through it. Some questions will take you a long time others will be quick.

Do you want to have a poor grasp of it and be done or do you want to become a better mathematician?

>>9000634
That's true. How do I know when a certain subject has become familiar?

With that being said, how do you look at a problem and confidently say "I don't need to do this" or "Doing this would be superfluous"?

I too had impatience with analysis. Came back to bite me in my dreams.

>>9000640
We are brothers in arms anon

>>9000637
Do all the problems and play with them after. Try to see why that problem was included and what it teaches you about the material.

If you look at a problem and can explain clearly to yourself how to reach a solution and justify it then you probably have a good grasp of it.

>>9000645
So, I should look at every problem? Those that fail the test you just outlined I should do?

>>9000642
idk how i got as far as i did. there were times when i would ace tests that the rest of the class would fail, and other times when i would just be busy contemplating applications of analysis and forget to do the homework. Fucking B+ in graduate functional analysis was a wakeup call.

>>9000646
If it's too easy try to see how you could make it harder. Maybe you could look for other ways of doing it. It depends on the problem.

If you are at ease with the problem then you can probably just move on.

>>9000629
>Doesn't like analysis
>Want's to go into applied math
You do know that a lot of applied math requires analysis, right?

>>9000629
Too bad, you'll never learn how to define a continuous mapping from your dick to that girl's ass and make your cum converge into her pussy.

File: doge777777766666622.png (134KB, 276x512px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 276x512px

>>9000662
what would you call the search for new analytical frameworks to distinguish it from the application of the logical processes of existing analytical frameworks?

>>9000629
Sometimes topics are just uninteresting to some people. Since analysis is probably required and you find it terribly boring just read it. Don't even bother doing problems. If you don't want to take that route then use a book that's not a fuckin meme.

>>9000629
You can try a different book. Charles C. Pugh's Analysis is a much better book than Rudin.

>>9000629
sauce?

File: tGTyl0t.jpg (119KB, 1000x707px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1000x707px

>>9000629
Analysis books like Baby Rudin are not gay if it has a feminine penis.

it's time to stop with the fucking rudin memes, it's not a good introductory book. read apostol or abbott. finish the chapters you need and then go over rudin.

>>9000997
Some girl I know

File: 014.jpg (88KB, 395x786px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 395x786px

>>9001009
this girl?

>>9001021
I wish nigga

>>9001021
brap

People who don't like analysis will be shit at math because they don't understand it

>>9001201
Well, that's if they don't complete* analysis, or rather, do it correctly

>>9001006
This so much. Baby Rudin is probably the best supplementary book and is great if your primary book doesn't explain something so well, but recommending it to beginners is bad advice if not plain cruel. In fact, I'm willing to bet at least half the people who rec it have never even cracked it open and are just repeating what they see posted here.

>>9000629
Sauce on this joocy butt?