How does Hughes-Hallett compare, and what to read next?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Opus_723
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Compare
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around evaluating the calculus textbook "Calculus" by Hughes-Hallett and its standing compared to other texts like Stewart. Users express that Hughes-Hallett is generally considered inferior, with some suggesting that even Stewart, which is also viewed as average, is a step up. Concerns are raised about the shortcomings of Hughes-Hallett, prompting inquiries into what students might gain from using Stewart instead. Recommendations for more advanced texts include Spivak and Apostol, known for their rigor and depth, suitable for honors-level calculus. Users also suggest exploring lecture notes from Reed College professors as a valuable resource. The importance of checking reviews and library resources is emphasized for further insight into the effectiveness of Hughes-Hallett and potential alternatives.
Opus_723
Messages
175
Reaction score
3
I'm looking to do a calculus review, but I'd like to use a slightly more advanced book than I did earlier this year. (Part of a new theme for me. I'm almost finished with Purcell's book after stumbling on it in the library. My class was using Giancoli, so I've kind of just discovered this "honors" freshman level material, and loving it)

But I need to know what level I'm at first. We used the 5th edition of Calculus by Hughes-Hallett for single and multivariable calculus, I actually liked that book, but I don't know how good it's considered to be by folks who know better. So I wanted to know (from anyone who is familiar with Hughes-Hallett, I don't know how common it is) how it ranks among the standards that I've seen mentioned on PF. I would guess that it's around the same difficulty level as Stewart from what people say about that book? But I don't know if it's better or worse than Stewart.

Also, I of course would like to know what a good next step would be after Hughes-Hallet.

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hughes hallet seems to be so bad that even an ordinary introductory book such as stewart would be a step up.
 
Good to know. Any info on what exactly its shortcomings are? What would one gain from Stewart vs. Hughes-Hallett?
 
sorry, i am not motivated to compare in detail the mediocre with the really bad.
 
I was just curious as to why it's so bad? Even a vague comparison would be useful. I'm a freshman, I haven't seen a lot of textbooks to compare.
 
I don't know how good or how bad that text is but here are examples of good (the members here would agree that they are so, at least) books:
http://kr.cs.ait.ac.th/~radok/math/mat6/startdiall.htm
Spivak

Since you wanted an "honours" variant, I mentioned those two. There's also one by Apostol that is used at MIT and CalTech. Reed College professors (two of them; one is Jerry Shurman but I can't remember the name of the other) have lecture notes that they use for their honours calculus classes. I haven't used them myself but they're meant to be good. Look them up in case you're interested.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My university library has Spivak, I'll take a look at that. It might be a bit above me, but I'll try and push through a chapter or two and then decide.
 
Visit Amazon and read the reviews on the Hughes-Hallett for example to get an idea of what others have to say about the deficiencies.

As for other books Courant and John Introduction to Calculus and Analysis is quite good and may also be in your University's library.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top