- #1
l'Hôpital
- 258
- 0
This Fall, I'll be an incoming freshman taking my school's equivalence to "Intro. to Proofs" class. However, I've been wanting to go ahead and start already, so I picked up Spivak's Calculus book, as many people suggested it to me as "real" Math. So far, the content itself is easy and understandable. His approach at the Delta-epsilon proofs was rather beautiful, if I do say so myself. However, when it comes to the problems, I just collapse. I'm able to some, but nowhere near enough to say "I've done enough for this section." It worries me. Am I not intelligent enough to be a mathematician? I mean, some of these proofs are doable, but then some I'm not able to understand them even after reading the answer manual. Granted, I'm not used spending so much time on problems (let's be honest, I used Stewart's for my Calculus knowledge and we all know those problems weren't exactly brain-busters) and perhaps I'm not spending adequate on time on them, but I can't help but feel like I should able to do them if they were in the problem set.
Should I be worrying that I'm struggling so? Is Spivak too much for someone who hasn't even taken their first proof class? How should one begin one's "mathematical enlightenment" for lack of better words? Am I just wasting my time? Or am I just worrying for nothing?
Should I be worrying that I'm struggling so? Is Spivak too much for someone who hasn't even taken their first proof class? How should one begin one's "mathematical enlightenment" for lack of better words? Am I just wasting my time? Or am I just worrying for nothing?