/lit/ - Literature

>>13225149
/sci/ has a chart

>>13225149
Alicia's Adventures in Wonderland

>>13225149
Serre's a course in arithmetic

>>13225158
Those charts are memes and everyone who's serious about math on /sci/ laughs at them and uses them to bait noobs like OP.
>>13225160
Not a math book, but has a strong mathematical flavour, which is why it's so loved by mathematicians in general (especially logicians).
>>13225149
Are you comfortable with HS math? If not, use khanacademy. If you are, start with Artin's Algebra, or if you're more into analysis, Rudin's Principles of Mathematical Analysis. Remember to do all the exercises.
>>13225184
Might I also suggest Weil's Basic Number Theory?(this is a joke)

>>13225149
What are you bad at?

If you can wield functional calculus and algebra well enough, you can use Von Neumann's Theory of Games and Economic Behavior to basically learn set theory. :3

>>13225201
Don't listen to this man, he doesn't know what he's talking about.

>>13225201
this is good advice, it's also just a good book in general.

When economics threads pop up, zero-sum games and terminology like that is sometimes used. other authors may use it, but that is where the terminology originated. as a piece of mathematical literature, it's very important.

>>13225193
These arent bad either

>>13225149

YOU MEAN: «WHAT», NOT: «WHICH», AND: «INITIATE», NOT: «INICIATE».

>>13225184
/sci/ meme 101

>>13225285
Wow you must be super smart

>iniciate
Pick up a textbook

To the people who get high-level math: What IS math to you?

I think it's taught as essentially "ways of counting things" until about grade 12 and then it "gets weird" with calculus, trigonometry, and things like complex numbers.

Is math the study of relationships? Of data structures? (Of the relationships in and between data structures?) What's your opinion on how the entire topic should be introduced in plain English?

>>13225149

what book does one take up to relearn math i got through two calcs but dont recall them and probably forgot earlier principles

>>13225149
Apostol Calculus
>>13225473
Spivak

>>13225149

>>13225657
>Wildberger

He's 3 good 5 this world.

Algebra by Israel Gelfand
The Method of Coordinates by Israel Gelfand

>>13225687
Also, Functions and Graphs by based Jew Israel Gelfand.

I recall an anecdote he once said me:
A Jewish boy has been studying economics and comes across the term "ethics". He asks his father what is "ethics"?
The father explains:
A man's at the counter at a shoe store. A woman comes in to buy some shoes for $80, but she only has a $100 note to pay with. She buys the shoes with the note and forgets to collect her change. Now here, the father explains, is the question of ethics: should the man keep the extra $20 for himself, or split it with his co-worker?

>>13225149
I got a soft spot for pic related.

i see you, skeltal

>>13225794
How come you met with Gelfand?

>>13225452
This is a good question. I'm a HS dropout, but I am dating a girl who's about to get her masters in pure math at a top college. I've learned more about math with her, and a lot has zero application to absolutely anything other than itself. First it's the study of shapes and numbers. Then it's the patterns in shapes and numbers and the relationship between shapes and numbers. Then also the patterns in the relationships. Logic is literally a branch of math. My answer to your question would be that all of math really is codified logic.

>>13227177
lol what a stupid post

bump

>>13227177
>Math is reducible to logic

>>13227589
Whats your point?

>>13227177
>. I'm a HS dropout,

>>13227392
>>13227589
>>13227657
Lmao, /lit/fags can't defend their opinions even from a hs dropout, absolutely pathetic.

>Quick Arithmetic by Robert Carman
>All The Math You'll Ever Need by Slavin
>Speed Mathematics Simplified by Stoddard
>Secrets Of Mental Math by Benjammin
>Basic System Of Speed Mathematics by Tratchenberg
>The Mental Calculators Handbook by Fountain
>Dead Reckoning; Calculating Without Instruments by Doerfler

Is Basic Mathematics a meme? Khan academy is OK but I’m sick of wading through shit I’m basically competent in to find the things I’ve forgotten/never learned
from grade school.

>>13227628
'Maths is logic' is pure early 20th century 'analytical' brainletism from non-mathematician philosophers not understanding formalism. And that goes much further than merely stating the impossibility of completeness in systems including arithmetic (although that alone btfo the errors of both Russell and Brouwer).
Mathematics are formal ontology. Read Husserl.

memes aside. Just look up your local CC or university and see what textbook they use.

>>13225207

Lang is absolutely not a meme though

>>13228691

No he's not a meme and he's good for precisely the reason you gave. The book progresses quickly. Khan Academy is good but it takes far too long to work through.

>>13230129

>Mathematics are formal ontology
I sure hope you guys don't do this

>>13230263
Well you can hope but I'm doing it anyway.

>>13230129
But mathematics *is* pure logic, that was basically what the victory of Cantor meant.
Mathematics is formally defined through axiomatic set theory, which literally is just logic. Gödels meta-mathematics has changed literally nothing and meming about intuitionists is pointless since they aren't representative of mathematics.

>>13230302
What's your definition of the real numbers?

>>13225452
Mathematics is the modelling of abstracted properties of the real world in an axiomatic system.

Algebraists might want to kill me for that, but I am not an algebraist.

>>13230609
You can use either constructs from integers (dedekind's is the most famous, but some other constructs are just as fine) or use specific axioms directly for real numbers.
Which is used as definition is a matter of preference in the exposition once you prove they are all equivalent.

>>13230607
Cantor certainly didn't think so himself.
You seem to make the confusion of the triumph of formalism with saying mathematics is formal logic. No, it is purely formal but not purely logical and has fundamentaly an ontological character. Read Husserl, or Godel and Hilbert after him. You need to have a basic bitch understanding of metaphysics to understand the transition between logic and ontology.

>>13230615
>Mathematics is the modelling
No. Models of mathematical theories are purely formal and have nothing to do with the use of the word model as in 'placate a mathematical object as explanation of an empirical study'.
>of abstracted properties
'abstracted' is very am iguous here. It deals with formal properties, but they don't need to be abstracted from any emploi rical object.
>of the real world
No.
>in an axiomatic system.
Yes.

>>13230129
Setting up an inconsistent system isn't an error. At most it's bad luck. They did nothing wrong.

>>13230607
Defining everything in terms of sets has also "literally changed nothing" (which is hyperbole in both cases)

>>13231308
They are not "equivalent", reals can be set up as a model and Dedekind reals are not only a model, they also depend entirely on your set theory

>>13231308 #
They are not "equivalent", reals can be set up as a theory in some logic syntactically, while Dedekind reals are not only "just" a model of that theory, they also depend entirely on your set theory

>>13225452
(pure) Math is philosophy for non pseuds

>>13225452
The direct manipulation of truth

>>13231308
>You can use either constructs from integers (dedekind's is the most famous, but some other constructs are just as fine) or use specific axioms directly for real numbers.
>Which is used as definition is a matter of preference in the exposition once you prove they are all equivalent.
Literally not my question.

>You seem to make the confusion of the triumph of formalism with saying mathematics is formal logic.
If literally every mathematical object is defined through formal logic, how does that not follow?

>>13231333
Let me guess, you are either an algebraist or completely uneducated about mathematics.

>>13231371
Say that to the intuitionists...

>>13225657

>>13225149
Novalis' Fragments