ay guys,
I'm in that situation. We've all been there. I have a midterm in a week, and I don't know my shit.
however, the class is Real Analysis (rudin's book) and the school is UC Berkeley.
it's a really harshly curved class, with a lot of smart kids. how do I do it? how do I pack 6 weeks of Rudin into one week? I'm about half-way to where I should be
I) Adderall?
2)no sleep?
3) ???
To be honest, it's not really possible to learn proof based math within a short period of time like you can with most subjects.
I have no advice,
>>7903213
>harshly curved class
>needing a curve period
You've failed at life
>>7903229
all stem at Berkeley is curved.
any other advice?
>>7903213
Gotta just face it that you'll be below the curve this time, anon
>>7903239
>needing a curve
You should be scoring over 90% each time.
I am guessing this is a Baby Rudin undergraduate class. What are the topics covered? His chapter 2 is honestly a pretty trash presentation of basic metric space topology, I would check out a topology book on that or look elsewhere to understand it better. His presentation makes it artificially difficult. What else does this cover? You might be fucked in all honesty.
>>7903213
>how do I pack 6 weeks of Rudin into one week?
you're fucked kiddo
Is it possible to learn the first half of introductory to discrete mathematics in 2 nights?
>>7903213
GL learning anything from Rudin. At least your grade in the midterm won't matter since UC Berkeley has a bretty gud reputation
>>7903497
first 3 chapters. ive got the first down.
>>7903540
we have like the worst grade deflation
>>7903535
The exercises past like 13 in that section suck as well. You gotta formulate some pretty convoluted example or set before you can even begin to tackle the problem, lots of work with little payback and sometimes even the solution won't make sense when you check your work. At least that was my experience. Gamelin and Greene on the otherhand actually gave you some meat in the question to work with ( if we are just comparing the topology section ).
hows ucb math anon? thinking of transferring there
>>7904136
>>7903535
Holy fuck Rudin chapter 2 still gives me nightmares
It was easy enough when I came back to it after doing part of Rosenlicht, but man is it ostentatiously bad for what the book itself is supposedly for
>>7903555
Don't be afraid to use other texts, especially for grasping the ideas (which you should memorize) behind the proofs in the text (which you shouldn't.)
>>7903213
Try to read from another book. Rudin's book is a bit compressed and can be pretty difficult to follow if you are not used to those kind of books, also their problems are bullshit.
I would recommend Lima's "Curso de Análise - Vol. 1" but is only in portuguese so maybe is not an option.
>>7903528
>Is it possible to learn the first half of introductory to discrete mathematics in 2 nights?
Yes, unless if you're a cs major, then no.
>>7905306
ah yeah, ive been doing that. I mean, I understand what rudin says, but he doesn't go over very many examples so my learning is very narrow.
also the problems are too tough to use for learning
>>7905037
>elements AND subsets of X
already this is wrong; either have them be elements of the set X or have them be subsets of X but you cannot have both. x and {x} are two different objects.
And they say this book is rigorous..
>>7906019
I'm leaning toward bait because nobody seriously uses ellipses but
>all points and sets mentioned below are understood to be elements and subsets of X
points mentioned are elements of X
sets mentioned are subsets
>>7906013
Use Kolmogorov's book.
>>7906199
any good source for it?
I'm on the first 3 chapters rn. and topology that briefly is killing me
>>7906227
I'm starting to suspect it's the same one guy suggesting Tao's books over and over
Tao's analysis texts are so obscure Amazon doesn't even stock them, it makes no sense that they're so popular here that the entire board keeps recommending it to everybody
>>7906065
needs more emojis
>>7906235
it's probably only a handful of people here who actually studied math and have a nice book to recommend.
Rudin is a fucking meme recommended by people who don't even study math.
Tao's book is obscure, but Tao is not. He's an eminence as a mathematician and as an educator, and every mathematician knows that. Many might not know he wrote a book on analysis, but tell them and they'll tell you it's probably amazing just because of who Tao is.
Ask yourself why am I in this situation then don't answer yourself and just suck it up and hit the books for the rest of the YEAR. You know, become a nerd!
>>7906256
>Rudin is a fucking meme recommended by people who don't even study math.
Every honors analysis course at all the good schools uses Rudin. The only people that hate Rudin are those who refuse to recognize they're not a special snowflake and there are good math books out there that they will struggle with until they have the maturity for it.
Rudin is to math as what fizzbuzz is to cs.
>>7906268
>if you dislike rudin you don't have math maturity yet argument
fuck no, it's like rudin is trying on purpose to make all the proofs convoluted and unreadable just because he's obsessed with making them short.
I already conceded that it's fine for giving lectures on it though, do read the posts. You can't possibly argue that it's any more than awful for self study. You just can't.
>>7903213
>how do I pack 6 weeks of Rudin into one week?
fucking KEK
>3) ???
3) Drop the class and start over next semester and don't fucking wait until the last minute, you fuck
>>7906256
>Rudin is a meme
Pretty much. I checked out Tao's books from my library and aside from the Peano memes it was a nice no bullshit presentation. Other sources I used have been Rosenlicht and Gamelin and Greene for the topology side. As an aside it's really Rudin's Chapter 2 that is the killer, the rest of his sections are not that bad, although his chapters on Several Variable Functions and thru Lesbegue integration should be consulted elsewhere.
>>7906256
OP is not self-study. OP's professor is using it
>>7906274
I'm self studying and I find Rudin a pretty good reference.
The worst problem is I always feel like I have to prove lemmas for every proof he writes.
The current open pages of my notebook have his proof on one side and a unsolved lemma on the other
>>7906256
I'm gonna drop in this thread to push Charles Pugh's analysis book some more. It's a great introductory analysis book!
>>7906589
go to bed charles
>>7906589
where to find.
I wonder how fuck you got into UC Berkely in the first place.
>>7906295
Drop deadline long passed. RIP op
>>7906835
right in the feels.
iusually just cram math and have no life for a week.
