I'm a senior in EE. I graduate in December. I want to get a more in depth knowledge of Calculus.
When I took Calc 1 through 4 I kind of just went through the motions. Basically, I learned a very superficial knowledge of the concepts in order to simply pass the exams. I quickly learned, however, that having an intimate knowledge of concepts like differentiation and integration. I often struggle in some of my classes to realize that something can be solved by simply integrating or differentiating due to the fact that I don't truly understand these concepts.
I feel like I have a pretty decent idea on differentiation, as it is more or less rate of change. Yet, I feel like I don't particularly understand integration at all.
Basically, I want to learn calculus all over again. What resources do you guys suggest? In my calculus classes we used Multivariable Calculus by Ron Larson. Is this a solid textbook to continue using, or is there a different book?
>tl;dr: retarded engineer wants to learn calculus better. I "learned" using Multivariable Calculus by Ron Larson. Should I continue using this book or is there a better one?
If you want a more theoretic approach praising formality you should pick either baby rudin or Spivak and work your ass through them and then start with analysis
Jeremiah Fisher
super bump
Ayden Morgan
I'm going to start a degree in EE in September, any tips?
Adrian Nelson
get good at programming in C and calc.
over and out.
William Hughes
This is correct, but don't start with Rudin. Do Spivak first. For your purposes, you might find Spivak satisfies what you want to know. If you want more though, Rudin is an excellent book.
Justin Smith
What on earth is Calc 4?
Ryan Reyes
Calc 1 is basic differentials and integration
Calc 2 is an intro to 3 and 4
Calc 3 is ordinary differential equations Calc 4 is multivariable.
Universities in the US interchange 3 and 4 because they're not really related to each other
Colton Flores
My school was: 1: Single Variable Differential/Integral Calculus 2: Integration Techniques, Series and Sequences, Coordinate Changes 3: Multivariate. 4: Really just Intro to Analysis.
Joshua Bailey
>C and calc Please tell me how you can do integral or differential calculus with C without numerical error. Protip: You can't, and would need a symbolic language to do so.
Easton Rivera
You're bad at English.
Oliver Fisher
OP here.
Thanks everyone
Bentley Wright
Don't bother with Spivak. Just get your dick wet in Rudin
Logan Jackson
OP here again.
My tips DOING WELL in EE are:
>NEVER skip class >Do every single homework problem and if you have ANY misunderstanding ask the professor >READ THE GOD DAMN TEXTBOOKS >Ask questions! Ask every question! >Don't be scared of the physics; it will be beat into your head and, again, ask fucking questions >DO outside research on concepts you dont understand. Dont understand circuit theory? Get circuit analysis for dummies. Dont understand Emag? Get the Feynman lectures + Griffiths. If you don't understand something after asking questions, look it up. Read EVERYTHING
Any retarded fucking monkey can pass engineering school. It's EASY.
Doing WELL in engineering school is where it gets hard.
Source: 3.8 EE GPA, just got offered an RA position for grad school for an MSEE in electromagnetics/ antenna theory
Nathan Cruz
Oh yea 1 more thing.
Don't expect to become proficient in a concept during the class it is taught. During every class I have taken at the end I felt like I didn't learn anything, but during the month or two break between semesters thing start to click. When you start back to classes you'll realize you suddenly understand everything from the previous semester.
Robert Flores
Spivak's Calculus if you want a mathematical (read: not homosexual) approach to calculus.
Nicholas Ramirez
Ordinary and partial differential topics are where most applied fields draw from. Surprised you didn't need it
Adrian Howard
Don't be insulting to OP. I think he can handle a little more than Spivak.
Kevin Sullivan
What's your suggestion then?
Landon Bell
Tao's analysis if you only want one. Pugh if you don't mind supplementing.
Ryan Evans
I'm a fan of Principles of Mathematical Analysis by Walter Rudin
Matthew Davis
>Hey, guys, I don't understand integration conceptually >STUDY RUDIN LOL
Kayden Robinson
You want to learn Analysis. Good books out there, what is your mathematical proof background? This matters for what book you choose. If you have non, Rudin will be a waste of your time ( too difficult ). Check out Spivak if this is the case. If not, shop around, Rudin is overrated, good but don't default to it.
He wants to learn calculus rigorously. Or, in other words, he wants to learn analysis. Yes he should start with Rudin. Perhaps after spending a few days on some intro to proofs book (what I did).
Blake Moore
The problem is that calculus is not a field of math in the sense you think about it. It is merely a tool that is used in a wide variety of fields, which is why it can be confusing when introducted to it. To cover every topic in calculus requires going across many many fields of mathematics.
It is as if you have been taught how to use a hammer. You can tenderize meat with it, hammer nails, demolish a building, hit a person, etc. In every case you use the same hammer, but use it in many different ways. You have been taught about the head of the hammer, the claw, the handle, etc and simple uses. That was your education in 'calculus'.
At higher levels, college, there is very little concern for how to 'make a hammer' or what it consists of. Hammers are incredibly simple after all. But how can you tweak a hammer to better suit your particular needs? How can you change your swing or use of it for your particular scenario?
On the other hand, you can study further how to use a hammer in carpentry to build an entire house and spend your whole life becoming an expert. Whatever it may be how you use it is more important that the existence of it.
In that realm of thinking, I would recommend finding a field of math which heavily uses calculus that you enjoy. But to study all of calculus itself isn't the most practical at higher levels.
Because ultimately there is no study of the calculus or the hammer so to speak but rather how to improve and use it.
Wyatt Phillips
Thanks user, looking forward to starting.
Ryan Nelson
Thank you op, I have similar concerns like the other guy. I want to get into EE as well although I have one last year of HS before starting undergrad.
Andrew Smith
>get good at programming in C and calc. is not the same as >do calc with C
Elijah Bailey
Which elementary calculus textbook (Stewart, Larson, Anton, Thomas) has the most difficult exercises?
Isaac Davis
I used Larson for high school.
I'd recommend Schaum's outline of Advanced Calculus for problems and Leithold's Calculus for theory.
Michael Jones
>Leithold's Calculus for theory. I have read Larson, Courant, Fichtenholz and Smirnov (his Course in Higher Mathematics) for theory. Just want to do some exercises (with complete solution manual for verification).
Dominic Green
Derive the concepts you have trouble with yourself. There are some ways to write an integral that, while simple to derive, require an understanding of the integral and aren't plastered all over the Web as definitions of the integral.
Christopher Harris
Hm.. This is an interesting idea. I'll definitely try it out!
Charles Perry
Any Turing complete language can. The first few chapters of SICP have you implement symbolic differentiation in scheme. I totally understand why most people make fun of comp sci students. The stuff really isn't rocket science and a lot of them are doing it for apps, web and video games which is just a massive shit fest, But then I'm always shocked at how little people understand about crap like this.
