Comparing "Calculus" and "Early Transcendentals" Textbooks for MST124

[NovaeSci]

I'm going to be starting my first Mathematics module (MST124 - Essential Mathematics I, at the Open University) and I have been looking or a Calculus textbook to use as a supplementary text.

I've found a couple of textbooks that I like the look of (Stewart's and Larson's), which both come in versions either named "Calculus" or "Eary Transcendentals".

I've done some searching and am I right in saying that usually when authors release these two versions, it's just a case of reordering the chapters, but essentially the textbook is exactly the same?

As mentioned, I'll only be using the textbook as a supplement, so should either version be ok, if I'm only using as a reference and using it for the questions? Another reason I ask is that I can get the standard version for £40; whereas, the Early Transcendentals is over £70.

Just to note, I'm not looking at advice on textbooks from different authors - I've already done this - just if the version of the textbook really matters.

Thank you in advance for your time and help.

 

[fresh_42]

Here is a good answer:
https://math.stackexchange.com/ques...arly-transcendentals-and-late-transcendentals

(I tried to figure out what "early transcendentals" mean and found it. I think the description can't be better.)

 

[NovaeSci]

Thank you for the link. I gave it a read; however, I can't say I really understood it, due to the fact I don't have any knowledge of the maths they are presenting.

What I did get from it is that Late Transcendentals have a problem, due to certain topics feeling like they are presented out of thin air; but, Early Transcendentals has a better way of presenting how thing about those topics.

But then it mentions E.T. is good for students of Biology, etc. Along with students who only take a short Calculus class.

From what I've read, it hasn't really answered my questions about which version to buy, as there are pros and cons to each method. But, without understanding the maths they're trying to compare, it has left me even more confused than before.

As mentioned, I'm only going to be using it as a reference book, and for the questions - due to the fact my learning will be guided by the OU's materials - so I'm still extremely unsure how each version will apply to my current situation.

If you are able to advise?

 

[fresh_42]

There are always pros and cons. I have used books in my native language, so I cannot really make a recommendation. People on PF often recommend Spivak. I would rather search for 'calculus 1 + pdf' possibly with '+ lecture notes' and see if I could get a better understanding. On the other hand, calculus books have the potential to accompany your lifetime, so you might want to purchase a standard book. If you plan to study then look at the university page for possible recommendations. In the end, it is more a matter of taste than it is a matter of the content.

 

[Frabjous]

Since you brought up price, buy the cheaper one. There is also no reason not to buy an earlier edition.

 

[NovaeSci]

Frabjous - I never mentioned editions - they're both the same edition. I asked about whether to purchase the Late Transcendentals or Early Transcendentals version.

 

[fresh_42]

Late.

("Early is good for biology students." translates to: Early introduces the exponential function earlier than later, and the function $x\longmapsto e^x$ is important in biology, very important. This does not mean "Late" doesn't also introduce it, only later.)

 

[NovaeSci]

Fresh-42 - Also, as mentioned, I wasn't looking at recommendations of different authors - I've already done this research. My current purposes, Larson or Stewart is what I'm after to supplement my current course. Spivak will be something I will purchase once I have a good grounding, due the fact I hear this is more of a Real Analysis book.

My university is the "Open University" which has its own printed materials, so there is no textbook recommendation page. I am only getting this book as a "supplement" for my Physics degree's Calculus module.

I have, however, looked at brick university recommendation pages, and it's either Calculus, or Calculus with Early Transcendentals.

Is there anyone who can advise on the differences between the Late Transcendentals and Early Transcendentals in terms of suitability of a student who is only using it as a supplement for a different point of view to my main University text, along with just using it for questions practice.

Just to mention, again, I'm not looking for other textbook recommendations. I just want to be able to understand the difference between the two on the level of someone who doesn't understand any of the book's material just yet. Rather than going into detail about the contents of the book, I just want to understand how the different versions will benefit a student who is only about to start touching the basics of the subject.

If only used as a reference book, and a book for the questions, does the version make any difference? Does the chapters on Transcendentals differ in terms of how they are taught in different versions, including the way it's presented; or, is it just simply a cut-and-paste job where the chapter is simply moved and the content between the two is 100% the same if you reordered the chapters.

I'm just really confused by this, so biggest apologies. I just don't want to end up being pulled down the rabbit hole and have more questions than I originally had, and feeling 20 times more confused, as I do now, ha.

Thank you again for your help.

 

[fresh_42]

At least you can't go wrong with either choice. Calculus is basically the same in all books.

 

[NovaeSci]

Fresh 42 - Thank you, from what I've read it seems the version makes a big difference when you are using it for self-study, or it being the main text for your course, if I'm correct? I'm just coming at it from a different angle. The OU's materials are top-notch, and I probably wouldn't need any other textbook than theirs; however, I feel it never hurts to have a different point-of-view, along with plenty of questions, which help you apply them to real-world problems.

 

[fresh_42]

There are 3 main parts of calculus: real, real multivariate, and complex.

I have three paperbacks that go along the lines my professor used for his lectures.
I have three paperbacks from another author which I liked a bit more, but they cover the same content.
Finally, I have a GTM book that is completely different. It is very elaborated and I'm glad I didn't have to read it for my studies. But when I want to look up something I still use the paperbacks.

It is a matter of taste and you should read a few pages online. Choose the one that matches your way of thinking. I am convinced that this is more important than other criteria.

 

[NovaeSci]

Well, that was my decision on choosing either Stewart's or Larson's. I have Stewart's Algebra & Trigonometry, and I really like how the questions have an "Applied" nature. So, in that sense, I think I'd be more partial the Stewart's Calculus. With Larson's, I was interested in the fact the solutions are available online for free.

I did do research on different Calculus textbooks, which Apostle's or Spivak's I nearly went for, before finally realising these are much more "proof-based". For this reason, I think Stewart's will be more beneficial - along with many people on different threads recommending - due to learning Calculus as a "tool". This was a great first exposure to Calculus. But you can revisit with Apostle or Spivak to learn it in a much deeper approach.

I also recently purchased Kline's Calculus, which I hope will supplement me as well.

 

[CrysPhys]

Fresh 42 - Thank you, from what I've read it seems the version makes a big difference when you are using it for self-study, or it being the main text for your course, if I'm correct? I'm just coming at it from a different angle. The OU's materials are top-notch, and I probably wouldn't need any other textbook than theirs; however, I feel it never hurts to have a different point-of-view, along with plenty of questions, which help you apply them to real-world problems.

Is there someone at OU you can ask? That is, which text would supplement (or complement) their materials the best?

 

[malawi_glenn]

Is calculus books even that important to have a good one? One will not properly understand most of the topics in calculus until one has started real analysis anyway.

 

[NovaeSci]

Again, I'm not after a debate on Calculus textbooks, or the rigour and "understanding" each one gives, as I've said a few times already - I have the OU's material for that. Along with how an understanding of the topic varies between each one, and how people will say things like "Don't study this, because (insert reason)". I know there are plenty of discussions between different Calculus textbooks, and how each one leads to a different understanding.

That is why I said from the get-go that I don't want to get into this. I've seen previous threads about how a beginner posts a very simple question, and before they know it, it's turned into a fiasco, in which the poster just wants to ask a simple question, but leads to an in-depth discussion. I'm asking about the here and now, rather than the future, where my needs for knowledge would require the more advanced need for knowledge

I'm not interested in knowing if I have a good one, or a bad one (not that I want a bad one, ha). All I wanted to know was if a Late Transcendentals version of a textbook would pose any disadvantage to a textbook with Early Transcendentals, for someone using it as a supplement book, purely to have a different POV and provide questions.

Sorry if I'm coming across as a bit frustrated, but I was just looking for a simple answer and help and wanted to keep on topic. Kind of like a kid wanting advice on how to ride a bike for the first time and asking for advice about staying on balance. But, then I'm being taught about which motorcycles I should be riding. Or, that all I'm trying to learn is how to make a good alcoholic cocktail, but I'm being directed on how to actually make the alcohol from scratch and I should learn to make Tequila first, and grow Oranges, before making a Tequila Sunrise.

CrysPhy - at the Open University, the textbooks are designed to be self-contained. In fact, the OU textbooks are actually used by Universities around the UK (including Oxford and Cambridge) for their material. When you ask them, they only say that they are designed to be the only textbooks you need. And, that there are many others which would be useful if you feel you need an additional perspective - but this is down to the student who should look to see which they prefer, as there are so many. I guess this is understandable when you are asking the people who authored the textbook. I thought asking on here might actually give a wider variety of answers, compared to a single entity.

Fresh_42 and everyone else: - thank you for your help. It's been much appreciated. I'll go with Late Transcendentals as Fresh_42 advised. With E.T. being more suited for Biology students, but that L.T. doesn't mean it doesn't contribute. There are 27 of us in the group studying this module which I'm asking on behalf of, so thank you for your advice and I will relay your knowledge to everyone of how L.T. is the best way to go. Everyone is purchasing this book, so we wanted to know for definite before we all spent £40 (or £70). I feel a bit more confident now, rather than before if I told them to order the wrong book.

Thanks again. All the best

 

[fresh_42]

One will not properly understand most of the topics in calculus until one has started real analysis anyway.

You mean the point where "Let $\varepsilon >0$" turns into "Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a $\sigma$-algebra"?

 

[MidgetDwarf]

There really is no difference, except when f(x)=e^x appears. Get which ever is cheaper.

If you want an introductory calculus book that is different, easier than Spivak, Courant, Apostol, but at a higher level than Stewart/Larson or what ever run of the mill calculus book.

Have a look at Calculus by Moise. Heck, even the third edition of Thomas Calculus (red book), is superior than Stewart, but also being a bit more readable...

 

[NovaeSci]

There really is no difference, except when f(x)=e^x appears. Get which ever is cheaper.

If you want an introductory calculus book that is different, easier than Spivak, Courant, Apostol, but at a higher level than Stewart/Larson or what ever run of the mill calculus book.

Have a look at Calculus by Moise. Heck, even the third edition of Thomas Calculus (red book), is superior than Stewart, but also being a bit more readable...

It's funny you mention Thomas' Calculus, as this was the third option for me. As mentioned, Stewart's attracted me due to the fact I love the "applied approach" in Algebra & Trigonometry. And, Larson's was the second one that interested me, as it seemed extremely similar to Stewart's, just without the need to buy the solutions manual separate.

Seeing as Thomas' calculus was my third choice, along with being the same type of textbook I was after, can you elaborate on this text? I will, eventually, move up to Spivaks'; however, what I'm after is a good text which provides a very good introduction which is focused on the applications of Calculus.

 

[MidgetDwarf]

It must be the third edition. People have discussed the difference between the editions of Thomas extensively on this forum. A quick search will pull up the results.

Moise blends applied and pure.

 

[Hall]

Here is a good answer:
https://math.stackexchange.com/ques...arly-transcendentals-and-late-transcendentals

(I tried to figure out what "early transcendentals" mean and found it. I think the description can't be better.)

I just wanted to put my point, be it accepted or not, be it entertained or not, but must be taken in good faith; linking Math.SE should be discouraged on this forum. People have this view that that site is highly peer reviewed and only valid contents appear there, and sometimes Wikipedia also cites it in Reference, but what is valid and proven is not always helpful.

Our forum aims not at appearing first in google search, but to really help the users, so we should develop the faith of new users on pre-existing users of this forum instead of directing them to a dairy center.

 

[Hall]

@NovaeSci If you’re taking lectures at some university, Stewart’s Calculus might help you as a reference and for exercises (thought it has a far too many), but if you would like to have a parallel understating of the subject from self-study you might try Gilbert Strang’s Calculus, it’s a kind of first time introduction to Calculus.

 

[NovaeSci]

It must be the third edition. People have discussed the difference between the editions of Thomas extensively on this forum. A quick search will pull up the results.

Moise blends applied and pure.

Thanks for that - I'll definitely give the forum a search for the third edition.

 

[NovaeSci]

@NovaeSci If you’re taking lectures at some university, Stewart’s Calculus might help you as a reference and for exercises (thought it has a far too many), but if you would like to have a parallel understating of the subject from self-study you might try Gilbert Strang’s Calculus, it’s a kind of first time introduction to Calculus.

Well with MST124, we will start learning Calculus in the way Stewart does: in an applied manner.
I will, however, be studying the follow-up module, which takes Calculus further, along with introducing proofs, so I should hopefully get a good understanding. I will most likely end up getting Apostle and/or Spivak's for when I get to this stage.
I've just had a look at Strang's Calculus and can see it's available for free on MIT's site, so I'll give this a look as well.
Thanks again for everyone's advice