TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Advanced Algebra textbooks

129 点作者 efm超过 9 年前

7 条评论

eliteraspberrie超过 9 年前
I don&#x27;t like the typical definition-theorem-proof approach of most textbook in mathematics, including these. It&#x27;s great for a classroom, no good for self-study. As an alternative, I highly recommend <i>A Book of Abstract Algebra</i> by Pinter. If you work through that first, you may actually enjoy these two later.
评论 #10874054 未加载
评论 #10874849 未加载
评论 #10873904 未加载
评论 #10874899 未加载
评论 #10874091 未加载
danharaj超过 9 年前
The best undergrad algebra textbook I&#x27;ve studied is <i>Algebra</i> by Mac Lane and Birkhoff (3rd edition! the previous editions aren&#x27;t quite as good and substantially different; i haven&#x27;t seen the 4th edition and it is out of print so &#x2F;shrug). I&#x27;ve used multiple books both in self-study and class and this book is, to me, in a league of its own. Not only does <i>Algebra</i> teach modern algebra, it teaches one to think like a modern algebraist, and not like just any modern algebraist, but like Saunders Mac Lane who was pretty great at algebra.<p>As an example of <i>Algebra</i>&#x27;s approach, take the isomorphism theorems [1]. Now many undergraduate textbooks (like Dummit and Foote) will prove these theorems by manipulating cosets and deal with gross &quot;implementation details&quot; at the level of sets. Mac Lane insists otherwise: The only time you have to manipulate cosets is in order to construct the quotient G&#x2F;N of a group G by one of its normal subgroups N. Once you have constructed this group and proved its <i>universal property</i>, the isomorphism theorems can be proved without ever mentioning cosets again. What is that universal property? It has two parts: First is that there is a morphism p from G to G&#x2F;N which sends all of N to the identity in G&#x2F;N. Second is that <i>any</i> morphism f from G to <i>any</i> group L that sends all of N to the identity in L necessarily factors <i>uniquely up to isomorphism</i> as a composition of morphisms g ∘ p. This is the essence of a quotient group.<p>Mac Lane&#x27;s approach is to apprehend the essence of what is studied while discarding as much of the set theoretic husk as is possible. It is algebra in its purest form, accessible to and transformative of the mind of an undergraduate. Reading this book is a recurring joy to me.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Isomorphism_theorem" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Isomorphism_theorem</a>
评论 #10874229 未加载
评论 #10876490 未加载
评论 #10874920 未加载
lumberjack超过 9 年前
Eh, is this supposed to be a good book because I have no idea why the definitions aren&#x27;t clearly marked and indexed. I only checked the chapter about Group Theory but I was not impressed. Maybe for a quick review of the topic it might be enough but for a beginner it seems that it is not rigorous. The definitions could be much more clear explicit. And there is no reason why they should not be indexed.
gaur超过 9 年前
Book titles like these are just more evidence that some mathematicians don&#x27;t understand (or willfully misconstrue) the meaning of words like &quot;basic&quot; or &quot;introduction&quot;.<p>&quot;Basic Algebra&quot; means &quot;material typically covered in late middle or early high school&quot;.
评论 #10874832 未加载
评论 #10874829 未加载
评论 #10874646 未加载
评论 #10874980 未加载
评论 #10874152 未加载
评论 #10874142 未加载
评论 #10874647 未加载
评论 #10896242 未加载
mdergosits超过 9 年前
Somewhat unrelated, but I enjoy the logical dependence chart. It&#x27;s nice to see the ordering of the topics. Rather than trying to figure that out for oneself
eccstartup超过 9 年前
I thought it was only a fancy book. But it turns out to be a serious one. I will read this book, especially the advanced one.
评论 #10873817 未加载
catnaroek超过 9 年前
I&#x27;m by no means a typography nerd, but the font used in both PDFs is really bad. Not only is it visually unpleasant; most importantly, it is genuinely hard to read.
评论 #10874143 未加载