Post best introductory book in your field of expertise.
Pic related.
![41Y61W2GRBL._SX299_BO1,204,203,200_[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/gi0bn3A.jpg "41Y61W2GRBL._SX299_BO1,204,203,200_[1].jpg")
not expertise, just topic for my bachelor's thesis, but this book is heaven
>>8115556
How much category theory do you use and how much of it do you know?
>>8115556
The reviews on amazon aren't that favorable
>>8115556
Sorry OP, but this is better
>>8115556
Sorry to disagree pal but this here's the Cadillac
>>8115556
Sorry mate, but this is the cream of the crop.
>>8115640
You don't need to know AG to study category theory
>>8116109
Not OP, but I disagree. It almost completely ignores the connection to Complex Geometry, which has some of the coolest examples.
Excellent beginner's reference for anything in aviation
/thread
>>8116099
>>8116109
>>8116153
All three of these books serve different purposes and have wildly different flavors. Shafarevich is a great introduction, Hartshorne is great for a more algebraic, scheme-theoretic perspective, and Griffiths Harris is a bible of the complex geometric side of things.
For a third perspective, the bible in my field are Demailly's notes--"Complex Analytic and
Differential Geometry." This is not so much algebraic geometry but what i would classify a analytic complex geometry--much more analytic and geometric than the above books (it's best approached with a working knowledge of plurisubharmonic functions and currents, for example).
>>8116153
Is that the same Griffiths that writes physics texts?
>>8116189
>Phillip Griffiths
>David J. Griffiths
>>8116153
>No Schemes
>Book on Complex Algebraic Geometry yet barely touches on Hodge Theory
lolno
>>8116112
But you do need to understand basic logic to understand math in general. He's not implying that AG is used in category theory, but rather that category theory is used in AG.
>>8115640
very little; though playing around with simple sheaf toposes that are not AG-y in nature might help, just to get an idea about how basic things like epimorphisms work
>>8116109
sorry mate, but you should read all of these
>algebraic geometry
more like autism theory
>>8116153
kiss your sister
>>8116398
Yeah, I agree. You need to have basic logic and math to understand math in general.
A highly motivated high school student could learn introductory category theory where the objects are sets and arrows are functions, then move onward and learn basic group theory and so on.
>>8117569
Tbh before you start talking about schemes, algebraic geometry is probably one of the more intuitive fields in math. I mean varieties are essentially just the zero locus of some set of polynomial equations (either globally or locally). I mean you study some basic algebraic curves and surfaces in high school.
And schemes can become a lot more intuitive too if you put the work into studying them.
>>8117597
if you fully indulge into it you may end babbling about devil in the Pyrenees
>>8117619
>>8115556
>>8117640
By far the best introductory textbook for that field imo. Unless you like to delve into the hardcore stuff right off the bat of course.
>>8117637
sometimes I think his works are revenge on the world or a kind of anti-war fuse
Görtz-Wedhorn, of course. Although, Mumford-Oda will have to supplement until the second volume comes out.
http://cyber.eserver.org/unabom.txt
this is very nice introduction to autism
No chembros yet?
>>8117642
> far the best introductory textbook
ahahahahahaha AHAHAHAHAHAHA
>he didn't graduate from Playboy six years ahead of his peers
>he didn't get a full ride to one of the most prestigious pornographic subscriptions in the world
>he didn't get to observe some of the most brilliant minds in his field perform astonishing acts of depravity, years before they became popular
>he didn't prove the Loli-Guro Conjecture while still a teenager
>he didn't make significant contributions to BBW Diaper Pony Theory
>he didn't co-author a groundbreaking dōjinshi extrapolating hentai Nazifur amputee tentacle rape, while his colleagues were just getting into internet porn
>he doesn't currently head a research team of some of the top clown rape fetishists and incest cartoon artists in the world
Not everyone here is a dumb sheltered prude faggot you Mormon fuck
>>8117691
Fifth edition Atkins, nice.
Introduction to NMR spectroscopy, Keeler J.
Why all these algebraic geometry and no love for geometric algebra
>>8117934
geobraic almetry is a far more important field
>>8117934
Algebraic Geometry is a way bigger subject.
>>8118604
only because nobody study geometric algebra
>>8118529
Not as important as algemetric geobra.
>>8115556
>>8117666
Hi, Mark
i legitimately believe that this man was the smartest man to walk this earth
you don't realize it until you start going through his work
his contributions are just ridiculously enormous, and to have contributed so much over the course of his short career
nobody else even compares, it's just insane
how do i grothendieck mode?
>>8119369
I recently came across writings he wrote about life etc. can link you later if interested.
>>8118775
Scott?
>>8119376
please link
>>8119369
>Observer
Kek.
>>8119390
>>8119369
http://www.fermentmagazine.org/rands/recoltes1.html
Keep pressing the links at the bottom to continue reading "Preface" then "Introduction" then "Introduction Continued" etc.
I've been studying Category theory over the summer and in between studies reading his "Récoltes et Semailles". Enjoy.
>>8117692
>>>/r/eddit
trying too hard: the post
>>8119369
>observer
this explains everything
>>8119378
Jerry?
>>8115556
Best intro for scheme theory
>>8120248
*after Görtz-Wedhorn, of course
>>8120251
>Görtz-Wedhorn,
Never heard of it.
>>8119404
wtf am I reading
>>8120258
It's fairly recent (2010, I think). It's just fantastic on so many levels. Have a look through one of its tables of contents, you'll see why it blows the competition out the water. It can be found on Görtz or Wedhorn's website.
>>8117597
>algebraic geometry is probably one of the more intuitive fields in math
Really ?
I'm undergrad and our algebra prof (currently doing ring arithmetic, but he designed the entire undergrad algebra curriculum) teased us about making an AG-centric undergrad course but he ended up going with number theory because it's more standard and "students like NT".
How different is AG compared to NT ? Because I just don't find NT books as interesting as say Probability books (sorry... but it's the one topic I find super intuitive somehow) Or are AG / schemes / category theory things you just can't do without good foundations in NT ?
>>8121466
Well it's intuitive if you have some good classical geometric grounding and if you "speak" algebra (ie. if you are familiar with basic ring theory and have strong linear algebra foundations), otherwise it might not go very smoothly.
Also, it might not be so much that you can't do algebraic geometry if you don't know number theory, but rather that algebraic number theory has motivated the development of algebraic geometry as it is today (ie. scheme theoretic) and provides a wealth of interesting examples.
>>8121496
movie
>>8116385
Literally 100% of complex geometers have a copy of the book for a reason. Chapter 0 +1 as an intro to complex geometry is enough reason to get it. Voisin and huybrechts have COMPLETELY different perspectives.
>>8119369
Grothendieck was an insane workaholic. He was a genius, sure, but you don't write hundreds of pages a year of novel work by genius alone. You do it by putting in 16 hour days 7 days a week.
>>8122526
What were his major contributions to category theory?
