4 ms·
For those with more knowledge: in what way is Sheldon Axler's "Linear Algebra Done Right" (quoted in the list above) superior to Strang's "Linear Algebra" for t
by sarosh 17y ago
For those with more knowledge: in what way is Sheldon Axler's "Linear Algebra Done Right" (quoted in the list above) superior to Strang's "Linear Algebra" for the complete novice? As I can only pick one to work through, I would like to make a (somewhat) informed decision.
Edit: Thank you plinkplonk and acangiano. I'll stick with Strang for the time being then. Any recommendations for Real Analysis? The "Baby Rudin" looks to be just a bit out of my range.
- acangiano 17y agoActually, if you are a complete novice, Linear Algebra Done Right won't serve you too well. You need to understand basics before approaching it. I should probably include Strang's book as a first introduction, before Linear Algebra Done Right. On a side note, Axler's book is also $120 cheaper than Strang's (which may or may not matter to you). You could also watch the free lectures by Strang online, and then use Axler's book as a supplement. I personally think that Axler's exposition is far more concise and clear.
- plinkplonk 17y ago"For those with more knowledge: in what way is Sheldon Axler's "Linear Algebra Done Right" (quoted in the list above) superior to Strang's "Linear Algebra" for the complete novice?" A complete novice should go for Strang. Axler says upfront (in the preface iirc it has been a while since I worked through it) his book is intended as the second Linear Algebra book and assumes you have a base in Linear Algebra (matrix manipulations and so forth) already. Axler depends more on a classical "theorems and proofs" approach. Strang doesn't involve proofs etc and is more ocncerned with funamental operations and building intuition and so (imo) is more suited to the complete beginner.
- weichi 17y agoAxler and Strang are really very different books with very different intents. The most striking example is that Gaussian elimination is practically the first thing that Strang covers, but Axler doesn't cover it at all. I can't speak in general because I've only skimmed Strang, whereas I worked through nearly all of Axler. But if your interest in Linear Algebra is as preparation for quantum mechanics, then Axler is a great choice, perhaps even for a novice (though it does require a bit of mathematical maturity). Axler really hammers you with the idea that a matrix is just a way to represent a linear transformation, and that the numbers in the matrix depend on the basis you choose for the underlying vector space. This way of thinking is very helpful when you learn quantum mechanics. EDIT: Axler also has the advantage that it is short. Personally, I find it much easier to work independently through short math/physics books than long books.
- las3rjock 17y agoFor real analysis, I'd recommend that you pick up a copy of "baby Rudin" regardless, but for learning real analysis, I'd recommend a book like "A First Course in Mathematical Analysis" by Burkill. Other viable options include "Calculus" by Spivak (it's really a book on real analysis at a level somewhere between a typical freshman calculus book and "baby Rudin"), "Real Mathematical Analysis" by Pugh, or "Yet Another Introduction to Analysis" by Bryant.
- acangiano 17y agoAgreed, Calculus by Spivak is essentially a bridge to Real Analysis.