Geometry Elementary Geometry from an Advanced Standpoint by Moise

Click For Summary
"Elementary Geometry from an Advanced Standpoint" by Edwin Moise is noted for its rigorous and precise approach to geometry, aligning with the Birkhoff method, which assumes familiarity with real numbers. The author expresses that while the book has mathematical virtues and is well-written, it may lack pedagogical value for students seeking a deeper understanding of geometry. The discussion highlights a preference for Hartshorne's work, which utilizes Hilbert's approach, offering a broader perspective on Euclidean geometries beyond the constraints of real numbers. Despite personal reservations about its style, the book is acknowledged as a valuable resource for those interested in a rigorous derivation of elementary geometry from advanced concepts.

For those who have used this book

  • Strongly Recommend

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Lightly Recommend

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Lightly don't Recommend

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    1
Physics news on Phys.org
I no longer have this book having unwisely given it away when I moved out of my office. However I only gave away books I did not enjoy or felt little further need for. So I am guessing this is a book based on the Birkhoff approach to geometry, presuming familiarity with real numbers first, not the way I think geometry should be done.

I also seem to remember that the book is oppressively rigorous, in a non pedagogical way, over concerned with the sort of rigid precision dear to a mathematician but not so much to a student hoping to learn to understand something. So I recall this as a precise highly expert account that somehow removed much of the beauty of my favorite subject. There are several rave reviews on amazon for this book though, and it certainly has mathematical virtues. I still recommend Hartshorne's book above all others, including this one.

But if you want to see how elementary geometry can be derived rigorously from more sophisticated notions, namely the real number system, then this may be for you. At least the title is accurate in that sense.

However, Hilbert's approach espoused by Hartshorne, is much more general and reveals infinitely more Euclidean geometries that are related to this one as the infinitely many other Euclidean fields are related to the special case of the real numbers. I.e. there is no good geometrical reason to prefer the real numbers for geometry. The field theoretic properties that are needed however are only made clear by taking a more geometric approach first.

Still I wish I had not given it away, since it is a rigorous and expert treatment, just not one I enjoy. I hope I am not greatly in error about this book, but there is way to search it on amazon. This is a fine book, well written with high mathematical standards, as is Rudin, but it's also not my style.
 
Many years ago, as the internet was coming of age, I burned over 500 pounds of technical manuals. I realized I can look things up on the internet faster than I can find something in a technical manual. And just about anything I might need could be found online. But letting go of my several shelves worth of college text and other science books is another matter. I can't bring myself to get rid of them but there is very little if anything I can't find online now. Books are heavy and a pain...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
14K