Also of note, the author has a nice summary of advanced physics topics: Hamiltonian mechanics, thermodynamics, relativity, E&M, and quantum field theory, all in 26 pages: http://www.math.northwestern.edu/~mlerma/papers/physics.pdf It's not really a lesson, but a nice review for someone who knows these things.
You can see these notes as a testament to the universal power of math---someone knowledgeable in advanced math could easily understand this handout... Learn your math people: it's like superpowers!
You don't just "learn math" though, it's a full-time job to learn it. People go to university to learn math, and at least half of them probably don't understand it even then.
True that. It's definitely not easy or quick, but I think it is time well spent.
To use an investment analogy, any investment you do in learning math is guaranteed to succeed: it will never depreciate in value, and "owning math stock" will get you invited to some good clubs.
This is a very good course to take as an intro to advanced mathematics. There is also usually an Intro to Adv Math in most undergrad programs. I've taken both at the same time, and they have lots of overlap. I've found both to be TREMENDOUSLY helpful in approaching proof laden courses like analysis and abstract algebra. It really helped me understand things I had problems with in linear algebra--which I dropped out of because I didn't take discrete or intro to adv math.
Highly recommend anyone interested in higher maths to take this class.
Putting the material up for free is generous but it seems to me that a text needs exercises to be useful. Actually, when I pick a text to teach out of I try to study the exercises as much as the body.
I don't know what it is about discrete math, but I just absolutely hate it. I'm in the second discrete math class required by my university for their CS program and I feel like I'm just barely "getting it". Will give this a read through to see if it explains better than Rosen.
My experience has been CS professors teach Discrete Math poorly.
Had to take a mostly equivalent class (Intro. to Abstract Math) for my Math degree as well, and the professor explained the same concepts clearer and everyone seemed to come out with a good understanding.
> Students complain about perfectly fine texts all the time.
That is true, but JoshGlazebrook didn't say "Rosen's book is terrible", but rather "Will give this a read through to see if it explains better than Rosen". It is certainly a fair thing for him to struggle personally with the explanations in a textbook, no matter how good it is; and turning this constructive comment into occasion for a personal attack / judgement is, I think, unnecessary and unconstructive. By contrast, chris_wot's comment downthread (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7247572), asking what is unsatisfactory, seems far more likely to generate productive discourse.
(For what it's worth, I am using Rosen this semester, and find it roughly middle of the road; I like it, but can understand that it might not be for everyone.)
This was actually the "book" that my Discrete Math class used. It is nice because it is straight to the point but also often seems to skip some important explanations or further discussion on some topics.
I would say it is a good reference guide but definitely needs to be used in conjunction with other texts.
