I need to learn linear algebra over the summer, I've heard good things about this textbook and I saw it has a new edition that came out this year. Has anyone read it? What's your favorite linear algebra textbook?
>>16136071It's OK but the author insists on not using determinants so has to do eigenvalues in a very unorthodox way. Try Friedberg/Insel/Spence instead.
>>16136086That one you recommended is so expensive...Has anyone read this one? It's basically free. Or what about The Manga Guide to Linear Algebra?
>>16136071Gorodentsev. AlgebraIt basically introduces algebra using linear algebra and in turn treats linear algebra much more in-depth than the usual lin alg book
>>16136071Shlomo Sternberg's Advanced Calculus. Does both analysis and linear algebra
>>16136166that book isn't rigorous at all which is fine if you only care about computational linear algebra
>>16136071If you need to use Axler, use it as a supplement to Harvard's Math55 or else you'll miss out on a lot of important math
>>16136166>Manga Guide to Linear Algebrais axler and this meme book all you could find in the archives lol
>>16136168>>16136175seconding these. They've some of the best exercises I've ever come across in a textbook. Sternberg's way of doing calculus on manifolds is also extraordinarily based
>>16136071>another "how do i learn x" thread*yawn* just follow the /mg/ curriculum https://sheafification.com/the-fast-track/
>>16136071Just use Shilov. It's concise and cheap.
>>16136071Katznelson's Terse Introduction into Linear Algebra. Short and great exercises
>>16136071"Advanced Linear Algebra" provided you're not a brainlet
>>16136071Blyth's module theory
Dieudonné
>>16136071Greub
>>16136071just start reading lazy fag.
>>16136071Bourbaki Algebre 1-3
>>16136166Hefferon is a meme. Garbage written for CS grads written by a brainlet who doesn't understand linear algebra to begin with. You're better off reading random lecture notes than that abortion
>>16136071Lang's algebra has a great chapter in linear algebraä
>>16136175based
>>16136166Read the manga guide
>>16136175>>16136191>>16136322The book is too difficult and at the same time shallow. One of the worst book ever written. Not appropriate for anymore. It's not like doing multivariable calculus with differential forms and manifolds is such an obscure topic today. >>16136071It's a meme answer. Ignore it OP. I honestly think it's more efficient to go through a problem book. Like Halmos' or John Erdman's.
>>16136168I swear this board has the stupidest autists when it comes to book recommendations. Do you really think it is feasible to learn linear algebra from self study over a SUMMER from this book?
Op, just pick whatever book your university uses for the intro linear algebra course or look up what is commonly used in intro courses. Do problems and supplement with online notes and ask questions online.
>>16136206Is there anyone actually able to follow this
>>16136071Lin alg. is easy, you just need to grind problem sets
I have to take calc 1 this summer, any advice? I’m not Asian or white btw.
>>16137550Start here
>>16136168Kek
>>16137550Calculus With Applications Peter Lax
>>16137222Sternberg's treatment of ODEs and classical mechanics is very based though. I agree that some exercises are ball-bustingly difficult though
>>16137550Amann Escher, Analysis I.
>>16136230Actually good recommendation
>>16137240read 10 pages a day and you'll be done in two months. No need to do all the problems, the exercises have solutions
>>16136071Finite-Dimensional Vector Spaces Halmos
>>16136071If you're an Engineering student, read pic rel and save yourself from all the rigor bullshit.It also has sections when it goes through the real life application of concepts in linear algebra
>>16137245Seconding this OP, every linear algebra book is missing /something/ (in Axler’s case, determinants) so you’ll do best with a syllabus or course notes to guide you.
what about this? it’s linear algebra applied to calculus.anything similar but for differential equations?
>>16136071if someone recommends Axler's book he is full of shit and never read it. completely useless book
>>16136086It's definitely better early on, not just dumping out the definition of the determinant like some magical formula from on high, but it does really tie itself in knots later on.
>>16138891the best way to introduce the determinant IMO is to introduce it as the general solutions for linear systems . Then you show the geometrical meaning and then proceed with your abstract bullshit so that you can call yourself a mathematician and not an engineer
>>16136071>>no mention of hoffman and kunze/sci/ has fallen
>>16138477literally useless
>>16136071>>16136248Roman's book is actually good and not all that advanced. I'm pretty sure most undergrads could read it just fine
While I can't provide personal opinions or experiences, I can offer some insights into popular linear algebra textbooks based on reviews and recommendations.One highly regarded linear algebra textbook is "Linear Algebra and Its Applications" by David C. Lay, Steven R. Lay, and Judi J. McDonald. It's known for its clear explanations, numerous examples, and practical applications of linear algebra concepts. Many students and instructors find it accessible and comprehensive for learning linear algebra.Another popular choice is "Introduction to Linear Algebra" by Gilbert Strang. This textbook is praised for its intuitive explanations and emphasis on geometric interpretations of linear algebra concepts. It's often recommended for its readability and clarity, especially for those new to the subject.Additionally, "Linear Algebra Done Right" by Sheldon Axler is well-regarded for its rigorous approach to linear algebra. It focuses on conceptual understanding and proofs, making it suitable for students interested in a deeper understanding of the subject.Ultimately, the best linear algebra textbook for you will depend on your learning style, mathematical background, and personal preferences. It may be helpful to browse through the table of contents, read reviews, and perhaps even sample a few chapters to see which book resonates with you the most.
https://www.youtube.com/@TheMathSorcerer
>>16136168based>>16137240its absolutely doable if youre not a brainlet. Ive read some chapters of gorodentsev before and hes very good at motivating whatever he'll introduce and incorporating all the advanced algebra meaningfully, puiseux series were done particularly well. His proofs are also very concise
Gorodentsev for undergrad and Lang for grad is the /mg/ curriculum
>>16137550Sternberg, Advanced Calculus
>>16137881it's nice, right
>>16136071>Basic Set Theory and Algebra: Hints on Representation, Topology, Geometry, Analysishttps://arxiv.org/pdf/2101.02031.pdf
>>16138465>read 10 pages a day and you'll be done in two months.You can say this with any book, idiot. Better to pick a book focues on Linear Algebra if that is what you want/need to learn.>No need to do all the problems,Of course you won't do EVERY single problem in a book, but doing problems is very important and more time should be done doing that than reading.>>16139881>its absolutely doable if youre not a brainlet.Shut up idiot, I know you didn't learn Linear Algebra or even any math subject over the summer from a book. >His proofs are also very conciseYeah, because that is perfect for self-study in a limited timeframe. Moron.
>>16139960So you know fuck all about the book but are hell-bent on hating it. I will now hide your shitposts
>>16139930Category theory propaganda
>>16139960>>His proofs are also very concise>Yeah, because that is perfect for self-study in a limited timeframei know youre not very smart but trimming the fat is actually great for self study. Proofs shouldnt be novels. Actually try passing any math exam when you're incapable of concisely expressing yourself kek>I know you didn't learn Linear Algebra or even any math subject over the summerwhy project lol. Ive read several books over the summer and even during university. i havent completed gorodentsev but read enough to know it's one of the more pedagogically valiable algebra booksas for the other nonsense you said>doing problems is very important and more time should be done doing that than reading.you should spend most of your time comprehending the theory and proofs to then use those or similar techniques and ideas in your own proofs. problem solving can be a waste of time if you massively lack the resources for a problem, just look at all the schizos here trying to prove millennium prize problems.
>>16139963I'm not "hating" on the book you idiot.
>>16139986>Actually try passing any math exam when you're incapable of concisely expressing yourself kekDeciphering a concise proof and writing a concise proof are two different things, genius.>Ive read several books over the summer and even during university.Doesn't mean anything. I asked if you LEARNED a subject over the summer from a book. You haven't. If you don't care how much you absorb or how far you get, then reading any book is fine. >>16139986>you should spend most of your time comprehending the theoryHow can you "comprehend" the theory without doing problems?>and proofs?Making sure you understand and can follow proofs is good, but you should also be able to write your own proofs. Also, computational problems help with understanding. And if you can't solve a 4x4 system by hand on paper (given enough time) then you suck at linear algebra. >problem solving can be a waste of time if you massively lack the resources for a problem, just look at all the schizos here trying to prove millennium prize problems.What the fuck are you talking about? OP wants to learn basic linear algebra. I bet they are barely out of the calculus sequence.
>>16139986>i know youre not very smart but trimming the fat is actually great for self study.I find it funny that you claim I'm not smart when you type like a sixth grader.
>>16139871Thanks chatgpt.
what about Linear Algebra by Shilov?
>>16139867You are useless
>>16139930>book about category theory>finished in 2021Poor guy. If he’d done this 10 years sooner, he would have been employable
>>16136071axler is alright, don't know why people are hating on this book
>>16141068>axler is alright, don't know why people are hating on this bookBecause determinants are haram for him so he "defines" the characteristic polynomial first as (z-λ1)...(z-λn) only for the complex case then has to explain complexification and tie himself into knot for the real case and who cares for arbitrary fields lol while sane people just go with det(A- λI) and call it a day.
>>16136168>Gorodentsev. Algebrahttps://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLq3E5oubNNoBDXd2qvs2WF17L6az7MzCMLectures by the author
>>16136071If you want a braindead/CS-tier overall outlook on Linear Algebra (or glorified exercise book)>Anton>Lay>StrangIf you want somewhat rigorous book>Kunze>Insel/Spence/Friedberg>PelletierIf you want to go ham, and don't mind slavrunes.>A.Г. Кypoш - Кypc Bыcшeй Aлгeбpы>Ильин, Пoзняк - Линeйнaя Aлгeбpa>Бeклeмишeв - Кypc Aнaлитичecкoй Гeoмeтpии и Линeйнoй Aлгeбpы
>>16136168/mg/ approves
>>16140003>>16140006>Deciphering a concise proof and writing a concise proof are two different thingsYou learn to write concise proofs by reading them in the first place. Break them down to know what's necessary to include and what's not. Overly wordy proofs tend to be more confusing than helpful. Any grad student knows this. You even have books like Kallenberg's probability explicitly mentioning that in the preface.>How can you "comprehend" the theory without doing problems?By working out the ideas that make the proof work and coming up with your own examples (get into research and you'll see that it is possible to learn about something without doing exercises). Not to mention, Gorodentsev differentiates between exercises and problems. >computational problems help with understandingYou can easily come up with these yourself but Goro includes a few nontrivial ones too. In any case, it can be largely useless too, like inverting a large matrix over the field of 4 elements.>What the fuck are you talking about?It's clear once you read more math books. You shouldn't waste too much time on unreasonable problems. Some authors also like to put open problems in their books.>Doesn't mean anything. I asked if you LEARNED a subject over the summer from a bookI have. I memorized the proof ideas and techniques and successfully applied them in my research and coursework. I've also solved quite many exercises in a lot of them and come up with my own examples and applications.You can learn a lot from books and certainly finish a 400+ page one within a few months if you're motivated. Even the reading courses at my university tackle bigger books over the summer.Just stop assuming OP is some apathetic retard
>>16136071>>16136166>OP asks for book recs>immediately disappears, leaving his thread to diebot thread
>>16141643>Just stop assuming OP is some apathetic retardDude, you're suggesting OP learn linear algebra from a graduate book that includes a lot of unnecessary material. You're an idiot.
>>16139867Can concur.
>>16139867Can Concur
>>16141202>If you want a braindead/CS-tier overall outlook on Linear Algebra (or glorified exercise book)>>Anton>>Lay>>Strang>If you want somewhat rigorous book>>Kunze>>Insel/Spence/Friedberg>>PelletierI took a lower division class with Anton, then an upper division class with Insel/Spence/Friedberg. I felt well-prepared. Granted, I had a really good teacher for the first course. Maybe some are fine skipping books like this, but I don't recommend it.
