Which is more helpful for real analysis?

[anonymity]

Please note that this is a "double post". I was not sure if I should put this here or in the calculus and analysis subform.

If you must delete, I understand. But please, delete the one that should actually be deleted.

Thanks, and sorry =|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This fall I am taking my first proof based class (set theory), and this spring have the option of taking a number theory class or a proof based linear algebra class (i am taking an applied LA class this semester, and also, I am MUCH more interested in applied math than pure math)

I would personally rather take linear algebra, but one of my engineering classes conflicts, and would be a haste to work around.

I will be taking undergrad real analysis NEXT fall, and was hoping to find out which of these two would be more helpful for real analysis.

I think that the proofs for linear algebra will likely be more difficult (and the content more abstract). So, in terms of developing mathematical maturity, I think LA wins the chicken..

However, I was wondering, in terms of content overlap and helpful knowledge, which is more likely to prove useful for an intro real analysis class?

thanks in advance.

-anonymous

 

[micromass]

Number theory is pretty useless for real analysis. So you would be better of taking linear algebra. It's not that you need much linear algebra for real analysis, but occasionally it pops up. Also, if the linear algebra proofs are more difficult (something I doubt), then you should certainly take linear algebra!

 

[anonymity]

thanks for your input ^

I think that I was largely in denial when I posted this question; I really didn't want to have to rearrange my schedule...double majoring sucks =|

I did though, and it looks like it'll work out fine. I'm happy that I did. LA is far more useful and interesting (imo)...and has the added bonus of possibly helping me out for real analysis. Win win.

Thanks again =D