I'm start: Finance major here but I want to get a math minor and maybe go for engineering in my graduates.
Where should I start to start hammering calculus and some statistics? good textbooks, tutorials, etc.
>>7942420
>Finance major
Fucking worthless
>>7942469
Why would you say that when it's actually not the case
>>7942476
Because /sci/ is full of insecure undergrads
Undergrad math prof here:
Having worked with business students of various sorts, I'd say Stewart's Calculus text is the standard from what I have seen. Khan Academy is always good; as is MIT OpenCourseware. Take Business Calculus for sure; it's likely a requirement for your degree.
>>7944156
if he really wants a math minor stewart's calculus is not what you want.
although it will cover the calculus requirement for finances, you're going to want to study analysis OP, which is "real calculus". consider if you really want a math minor, because you say you want to go to engineering, so you might not want it or need it at all.
>>7942420
>Finance major
Fucking worthless
>>7944161
you need to see calculus from a computational/applied perspective for any of those fields, which stewart's does adequately. A rigorous course in analysis would be better after more exposure to abstract mathematics, like a course in proofs/basic set theory or intro. linear alg. Otherwise, it's very easy to get lost in the definitions/proof structures and miss out on the big picture, necessary calculational techniques, typical applied problems, etc.
>>7942420
Do you mean financial engineering? You're going to have to do a shit ton of math to get to that. A lot more than a minor's worth.
all of stewart's calculus
linear algebra
probability
statistics
stochastic processes
ODEs
PDEs
mathematical analysis
note that each item in this list may not correspond to a single course
this all gets you to the point where you can start some intro financial engineering w/ Shreve's two books (discrete & continuous time finance)
computer science, programming general, algorithm design would also help
>>7944249
There's plenty of better introductions to calculus than Stewart. Especially if you're heading for a math minor later.
Many analysis textbooks assume you've had little to know exposure to real math
Spivak, Apostol, Carothers
I think Pugh and Rudin even assume you know little
>>7944410
Frankly Khan Academy is better than Stewart. It just doesn't provide many (any) practice problems and this is where the real learning is done.
>>7944414
> drilling to learn
And people wonder why no times hate math
>>7944419
>no times
*normies
Ducking autocorrect
>>7944419
do you sincerely equate practice with rote drilling?
maybe you misunderstood what i meant by practice problems, since practice done correctly is intensely powerful
That is, the problems have to expand on the material done in the related section so that the student can make & build intuition/intuitive leaps on their own
its obviously trivial to teach a formula, but significantly hard to instruct intuition
>>7944430
Look at a problem set for a decent textbook and youll see little if any "practice problems" like Stewarts.
Its been a long time since I've seen 30 problems fit on one page
Comp. Engineer here. If you want notes on calculus gimme your email I'll send you everything from the first lecture up to now.
