- #36
Quantum55151
- 37
- 14
@mathwonk Sorry for the delay in my response. I was preparing for finals.
Auroux writes in the course syllabus that no formal knowledge of linear algebra, group theory or analysis is required, but a familiarity with proof-writing and abstract reasoning as well as a commitment to a fast-paced course is. What this actually means in practice is a separate question.mathwonk said:It is not entirely clear to me what preparation is expected, or usual, for success in 55.
I'll check out, thanks!mathwonk said:As to learning differential forms, there was a thread here on PF devoted to that topic some years back, and they went through a very nice book by David Bachman, available from him free online:
https://faculty.washington.edu/seattle/physics544/2011-lectures/bachman.pdf
Do you know anything by Elements of Classical Analysis by Marsden and Hoffman? This is the book used in 25b.mathwonk said:As for Rudin's Principles of analysis book, it is famous for being very precise but very unmotivated, so I never recommend it for learning. But analysis professors love to recommend it, so you should take a look, maybe it will work for you. I prefer books by Spivak, Apostol, Berberian, Fleming, Lang, Simmons, and although quite difficult I admire Dieudonne'.
Even though you were the oldest student?mathwonk said:On the topic of the student body in math 55: yes one will naturally feel intimidated at times, maybe most of the time. I definitely felt that way when there.