How do I into self teaching

How do I into self teaching.

Other urls found in this thread:

math.wisc.edu/~keisler/calc.html
docs.google.com/file/d/0B0uVd31B7zGEOHZiWWVUclRHYm8/edit?pref=2&pli=1
matrixeditions.com/VC5.contents.pdf
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

read
understand
do exercises while cementing
goto read

That book is pretty difficult, OP. If you're simply trying to learn calculus, look elsewhere. If you're interested in real analysis, then that's a good choice.

Any suggestions?

Elementary Calculus by Kreisler. Cheap to buy.

math.wisc.edu/~keisler/calc.html
or you can get the pdf for free
but i dont agree with how they teach it

You can get any textbook for free. But it's cheap on Amazon too. I bought it myself because I'm used to using physical books.

True, I definitely prefer using physical copies over pdfs.

Latching onto this thread. What book to people recommend if I'm looking to self-teach calc?

Get Thomas Calculus early transcendentals 12th edition. Easiest book to learn from. Just Google it there's a PDF. Or check on gen lib. If you need help with solutions go on slader/Slater idk I forgot how it's spelled or get a solutions manual, which is also online somewhere.

>spivak
>poor motivation
>apostol
>good motivation

JIDF pls go

I think the difficulty of Loomis/Sternberg is a bit overhyped. It's difficult and abstract material treated in a balls-to-the-wall fashion, but the exposition is so extraordinarily clear and well-motivated that I think any dedicated sophomore/junior could make it through.

>Differential and Integral Calculus by the Russian mathematician N.S. Piskunov (hard to come by)

found a pdf within a minute
docs.google.com/file/d/0B0uVd31B7zGEOHZiWWVUclRHYm8/edit?pref=2&pli=1

Do you take notes from the book when you self-teach?

You go through the derivations and do the problems. Often the author will skip proofs and steps. Fill in the gaps yourself in "notes.". You don't read mathematical or any technical literature with out a pen and pad handy

Because without standing in a class with a bunch of people and wasting time listening to some guy reading from a textbook is much better yea...

Op use books that were made for self study - that's the only secret, once you get the hang of it from them - you can get professional college textbooks and "raffinate" your understanding from it.

Watch professor leonard or sal khan

hey it is possible to use goto's responsibly

I write C for a living, and I agree with you.

That said, I've never seen an appropriate use of goto that has the goto after its destination. Just use a loop for Christ's sake.

>was recommended hubbard as an undergrad-friendly text to learn a bit of extra math
>having a hard time getting past a single page
>actually considered an advanced text

wew lad

Is it really that hard? Because I need to get some Vector and Multivariable Calc after Spivak.

Clearly someone trolled you hard on the Hubbard recommendation then.

This is the textbook used for the math 223/224 Theoretical Calculus and Linear Algebra sequence in Cornell University. The book is designed for prospective math students. Although the book mainly follows a rigorous development of the theories of multi-dimensional calculus, the mathematical machinery used in developing the theories is immensely broad, especially in linear algebra. The book covers most of the standard topics in a first semester linear algebra course and touches on many other areas of mathematics such as, real and complex analysis, set theory, differential geometry, integration theory, measure theory, numerical analysis, probability theory, topology, etc. The highlight of the book is its introduction of differential forms to generalize the fundamental theorems of vector calculus. The author is not the first one who follows this path. There are many other books written before this one that have similar approach, such as Calculus On Manifolds by Spivak, which was written 40 years ago and was too old to suit modern students.

The author tries hard to retain rigor and present to the readers as many examples and applications as possible. Often he tries to cover a broad range of mathematics and digresses a little. The book more or less touches on most of the areas of undergraduate mathematics curriculum and does not go into depth. It sometimes gives me the impression that the book is almost like a survey of undergradute math. The book is also not error-free. There are many typos and some technical errors. If you buy this book, make sure to get the errata from the author's website.

it's certainly interesting, and I've learned quite a bit so far. Very abstract stuff.

I see. I probably need some other book before that. Perhaps Apostol Calculus Vol. II? Thanks for the heads up though.

if you got through spivak and know linear algebra, I'm sure you can get through it. The linear algebra is basic undergrad shit with matrices, change of basis, all that crap. The actual calculus is pretty difficult though.

I see. I'm clueless on Linear Algebra so I might pick a book up on it then maybe go to Hubbard. Thanks for the suggestion, user.

>math.wisc.edu/~keisler/calc.html
why don't you agree with how they teach it?
I haven't read the book btw

using infinitesimals to teach calculus only sets the student up for failure because that's not how it's done anywhere else

Bullshit. Most calculus class don't prove shit.

I learned with limits. How does learning derivatives with infinitesimals differ? What does it look like? inb4 stupid question. Just wanna know what you mean.

Limits is the way to go though

Nonstandard Analysis

Then get off. Spivak is an analytical approach to calculus that's a good introduction to real analysis.

I'm not really sure what's in Hubbard, but I did a fair amount of things involving differential forms in undergrad (2 semesters of differential topology).

I think that if you're hopping right into this stuff, it's going to be impossible, but if you've seen a lot of the stufff developed before without forms, and you have previously seen multilinear algebra, you'll be alright.

read
reading is boooring
goto Veeky Forums
shitpost

matrixeditions.com/VC5.contents.pdf

Stewarts book is my favourite. Spivak was really nice bit I was too retarded for the problems

As an undergrad I almost never attended class (math, if relevant). Instead, I taught myself exclusively from textbooks. I strongly preferred it because I could go at my own pace, and consider what I wanted to along the way. Took over a dozen grad classes and graduated with a 4.0.

So I am essentially entirely self-taught; the only external factor was the mandatory problem sets, which were certainly crucial. So I would emphasize that you absolutely must do the exercises -- especially those that you have to spend hours thinking about, because those are the ones that really force new understanding and synthesis.

An aspect of thinking very hard about the material and trying to truly understand it is coming up with your own questions about tangential topics, and then trying to answer them. If you don't come up with your own questions, you're not thinking hard enough.

Spivak exercises will wreck you if this is your first approach to calculus. I recommend a textbook with easier problem sets.