Are Books Necessary to Understand Mathematical Proofs?

  • Thread starter Thread starter hellbike
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Book Proofs
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around the necessity and value of books focused on understanding proofs in mathematics. Participants question whether such books are essential for grasping the concept of proofs or if they merely offer examples akin to simplified math guides. There is a debate on whether it's more beneficial to learn proofs through standard math texts, like calculus, or to use dedicated resources. Two specific book recommendations emerge: "How to Prove It: A Structured Approach" by Daniel J. Velleman and "Discrete Mathematics with Applications" by Susanna S. Epp, with the latter suggested as a potentially better introductory resource for those interested in proofs.
hellbike
Messages
61
Reaction score
0
I'm looking for book about making proof.

Is this kind of book even required to understand proofs? Is there some special theory behind proofs, or books about proofs just provide examples, and are more like "math for dummies" ?

I'm not sure if it's proper to use that kind of book, should i figure everything out by myself from books about standard math topics (like calculus) ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How to Prove It: A Structured Approach by Daniel J. Velleman

or probably a better introduction if you can afford it

Discrete Mathematics with Applications by Susanna S. Epp
 

Thread 'Book recommendation after Sakurai Modern Quantum Physics'

TL;DR Summary: Book after Sakurai Modern Quantum Physics I am doing a comprehensive reading of sakurai and I have solved every problem from chapters I finished on my own, I will finish the book within 2 weeks and I want to delve into qft and other particle physics related topics, not from summaries but comprehensive books, I will start a graduate program related to cern in 3 months, I alreadily knew some qft but now I want to do it, hence do a good book with good problems in it first...
View full post »

Thread 'Blennow to follow up Altland?'

TLDR: is Blennow "Mathematical Methods for Physics and Engineering" a good follow-up to Altland "Mathematics for physicists"? Hello everybody, returning to physics after 30-something years, I felt the need to brush up my maths first. It took me 6 months and I'm currently more than half way through the Altland "Mathematics for physicists" book, covering the math for undergraduate studies at the right level of sophystication, most of which I howewer already knew (being an aerospace engineer)...
View full post »

Similar threads

Calculus What Is the Best Calculus Book for Self-Learners?
Replies
17
Views
6K
Suggestions for HS geometry book (proofs)
Replies
14
Views
1K
Foundations Should I start with Lang's Basic Mathematics or Gelfand's books?
Replies
4
Views
6K
Book on how to define ideas rigorously
Replies
6
Views
2K
Intro Math Plan to revise my learned math & start learning pure math
Replies
5
Views
4K
Quantum An alternative route to learn mathematics for physics, the "rigorous way"
Replies
6
Views
4K
Classical The best introductory mechanics textbook
Replies
39
Views
7K
Algebra Book on how to write proper proofs in Group Theory
Replies
1
Views
2K
Intro Math Hassani's books on Mathematical Physics/Methods
Replies
2
Views
4K
Geometry Geometrical books (differential geometry, tensors, variational mech.)
Replies
2
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top