You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

tgb comments on A Quick and Dirty Survey: Textbook Learning - Less Wrong Discussion

7 Post author: AmagicalFishy 10 March 2013 07:55PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (20)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: tgb 11 March 2013 01:45:38AM *  0 points [-]

Spivak is not an easy book and is probably not a great way to learn calculus. It is, however, an excellent start to learning rigorous mathematical techniques and gives you great foothold for for later topics in math such as analysis. The calculus course I took used "Vector Calculus, Linear Algebra, and Differential Forms: A Unified Approach" by Hubbard and Hubbard - it is essentially a slightly more modern and easier to read version of Spivak. The people I took that course with all had superb starting points for their later math courses compared to others (warning: selection bias! those who took the course were more interested in math, etc.), but we often lamented the fact that we weren't very good at actually doing much with multivariable calculus when it came to, say, physics courses. That's more because the differential forms introduced in Spivak are not the standard way of writing calculus in other domains than because what Spivak is doing is inherently harder.

In short: Spivak is hard. Taking a long time on it is not surprising in the least. It's probably not your most 'efficient' route to learning multivariable calculus, but it is a good way to learn to do proofs and think mathematically. Keep chugging away at it! Doing all the problems is probably a bit much and I, at least, would be more likely to not complete it if I were doing all the problems. Maybe you can find the list of used problems from a course and use that instead. Good luck!

(Edit: disclaimer, I've only used Spivak as a supplement to Hubbard & Hubbard)

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 11 March 2013 12:28:40PM *  2 points [-]

You seem to be talking about Spivak's "Calculus on Manifolds", while the post is about "Calculus". Munkres's "Analysis on Manifolds" is a more didactically forgiving book than "Calculus on Manifolds" (and Hubbard's book works as preparation for both).

Comment author: tgb 11 March 2013 04:13:08PM 0 points [-]

That's quite possible - I spent some time trying to figure out which was which but gave up and no longer have my copy. Which one is known as "baby Spivak"? (That's the one I was referring to.)