- #1

SMA_01

- 218

- 0

Thanks.

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter SMA_01
- Start date

- #1

SMA_01

- 218

- 0

Thanks.

- #2

Dembadon

Gold Member

- 654

- 89

Thanks.

Weak proof-writing is going to be a major problem for the rest of your degree, especially in an analysis course. Simply understanding a proof is not enough. You

Can it be done? Sure, but it's going to take you an excruciatingly long time to work problems if you have to learn analysis and proof-writing concurrently. I'd advise that you wait; take another semester and work on proving theorems from your abstract algebra textbook, if you still have it.

- #3

SMA_01

- 218

- 0

- #4

SMA_01

- 218

- 0

I wanted to know, which class helped you better your proof writing skills?

- #5

Dembadon

Gold Member

- 654

- 89

I've heard it both ways: some say algebra is harder while others claim analysis is. At my university, functional analysis is regarded as the most difficult undergraduate mathematics course by most everyone I've spoken with; one of them being a national merit scholar who has been doing math competitions since he was 10 years old.

In my opinion, the most significant factor regarding course difficulty is the instructor.

I wanted to know, which class helped you better your proof writing skills?

I took an "intro to proofs" course last semester. It touched on number theory, set theory, arithmetic in

This will not be the case in real analysis; you will be expected to already be comfortable with writing proofs. It can be done, but you will need to devote extra time and have a lot of patience with yourself. And be humble (ask for help!).

- #6

SMA_01

- 218

- 0

Thank you very much!

- #7

Snicker

- 47

- 1

Proofs are prose: Be concise and clear.

- #8

Dembadon

Gold Member

- 654

- 89

Proofs are prose: Be concise and clear.

Isn't clear [itex]\subset[/itex] concise?

- #9

SophusLies

- 222

- 0

- #10

Visceral

- 59

- 0

I would say that generally course difficulty is more dependent on the professor than anything. With that being said, its hard to tell which undergrad course in those topics would be more difficult at your university. The best you can do is ask your advisor or students that have already taken both classes to give you their opinions.

I haven't taken abstract algebra yet, but I did take real analysis 1 with students who are

I am currently in Analysis 2. The topics are no less abstract(actually technically they should be more abstract, seeing as we are now in n dimensions), but the course is definitely easier because the professor is more laid back and doesn't require weekly hard problem sets AND the course isn't required for the degree.

With all of that being said, I took analysis 1 right after I took the standard introduction to proofs course. Analysis was(and is) just on another level completely. You just get thrown into hardcore difficult proofs right from the get go. So if you do take it, my advise is be prepared for some intense work. When I got a B in that class, I was relieved, because the final exam was 3 hours long and there were over 13 proofs which made 3 hours seem like a joke(and hence, made me think I nuked the exam and got a C or worse).

Good luck, go for it, but be ready.

Edit: I realize sophuslies just said what I did basically but more concise, my bad.

- #11

Robert1986

- 828

- 2

Share:

- Last Post

- Replies
- 8

- Views
- 701

- Last Post

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 548

- Last Post

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 166

- Last Post

- Replies
- 29

- Views
- 1K

- Replies
- 45

- Views
- 2K

- Replies
- 24

- Views
- 784

- Last Post

- Replies
- 10

- Views
- 381

- Last Post

- Replies
- 8

- Views
- 677

- Last Post

- Replies
- 9

- Views
- 287

- Replies
- 14

- Views
- 583