Most Helpful Customer Reviews
57 of 57 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Definitely a good first text, September 4, 2002
I bought this book because I have been looking for a Introductory analysis text that isn't too advanced, but yet doesn't gloss over the essential stuff, and I found it in Lay's book. For the self-studier, this book is excellent! I have several books on analysis: Shilov, Kolomogorov, Rosenlicht, Ross,etc... For the beginner, this book is superior to all of them. A plethora of examples. Also, a good range of problems:from straight forward problems requiring only the use of a definition to more advanced problems requiring a little thought. If you already have had some Analysis, then this book is probably not for you. But, if you are a student who wants to learn Analysis on your own, then this book would be hard to beat. After this book, one should be able to tackle "Papa Rudin". For according to Rudin, all that is needed to study his "Real and Complex Analysis" tome, is the first seven chapters of his "Principles of Mathematical Analysis". This book covers all that Rudin covers with the exception of Riemann-Stieltjes integration. On the whole, this is a great start! If proof-based math is new to you, then you will appreciate the first chapter on proofs. Would have given five stars, but I would have liked to seen Riemann-Stieltjes integration. That's really only nit picking, though.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
50 of 51 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
This book was surprisingly good, July 2, 2002
I didn't think this book was going to be very good, but the author has "proved" me wrong ;-) This book starts out so basic that in my class (which was the first analysis course in our math department) we actually skipped the first 1/3 or so of the book. The first 9 or 10 sections consist of stuff like basic set theory, logic, definition of a function, etc. I would think that even the most elementary Analysis books would completely leave this out and expect that the reader is already familiar with this. So if you need it, this book will be a good resource for you. Then the book goes into a very nice introduction to topology. Basic concepts like open/closed sets, accumulation points, compact sets, etc. Topology can be a little intimidating simply because it's _so_ abstract, but this book makes the basic concepts very easy to understand, and prepares one for a more advanced course in topology. Alot of (good) Elementary Analysis books leave topology out, but I'm glad this book contained it. It is a very interesting subject. All the material in the book is explained probably about as easily as the concepts CAN be explained. If you still have trouble with it, you might consider a different major. Not to say that this book transforms a very difficult subject into a pathetically easy piece of cake because that's impossible, but the material is presented probably as easily as it can be in order to maintain precision and detail (which is the whole point of Analysis). The book is definitely not running short in the examples or end-of-section problems department, so that is another plus. The problems at the end of each section range in difficulty from problems that almost exactly match an example worked in detail in the section, to fairly challenging problems. With enough time though the average student could probably do every problem at the end of every section. I'd recommend this book for self study as well as a supplement to any introductory analysis course. If you have already have exposure to rigorous proof of calculus theorems, then this book will probably be too basic for you. The reason this book got 4 stars instead of 5 is because of its utterly ridiculous price. Just as good is Elementary Analysis: The Theory of Calculus, ISBN: 038790459X, except that it doesn't include the section on Topology ...
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
21 of 21 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Acceptable but could have been better., April 20, 2008
This review is from: Analysis: With an Introduction to Proof (4th Edition) (Hardcover)
This is fairly basic introduction to Principles of Analysis, on intermediate undergrad level, strictly in R^1. The only other similar book I'm familiar is Kirkwood. The books of Rudin, Apostol, etc present the subject on much higher level.
My original intention was to take a course with Rudin, but after I've realized I had a hard time digesting his style, I've decided to take more elementary course. I knew the course would be using Lay, so I got this textbook and tried to learn it on my own, but wasn't sure how I was doing and ended up taking the course (still with Lay) anyway. So I'm quite familiar with this textbook. The only topics we didn't cover is "series" and "sequences and series of functions".
Now overall I would say it's a mixed bag. First, the good things. The first few introductory sections on sets and proof techniques are excellent, highly recommended, that's how I learned how to prove. I found exercises very useful.
Now things I don't like. First, lots of typos. I think I had 4th edition, and still I've managed to find over 20 misprints, incorrect references, etc, etc, all were reported directly to author. Second, and that's probably more important, in several instances the proofs are too convoluted and not self-motivating. To be more specific, the proof of Heine-Borell theorem is less than adequate. It is correct, but that's the kind of proof you read and then entirely forget how it went. I remember on the first reading I didn't feel comfortable with this proof at all. When I discussed this book with professor I was going to take that course with, he (surprisingle) agreed with me and told me he would present a different proof (and he did, much better one). Another example: proof that the modified Dirichlet function is Riemann-integrable. The proof can be substantially simplified. In fact, I've managed to simplify it. Finally, the same professor told me Lay's presentation of Riemann integrals had some holes in them, so he used Kirkwood instead. In fact he told me he was making choice between Kirkwood and lay (but ended up choosing Lay because he didn't like Kirkwood's book layout. Kind of funny reason, I think.)
In any case, I think Kirkwood is a bit better for self-study. Unfortunately it doesn't have intro to proofs, logic and sets. Ideally you should have both books, if you plan for self-study.
(note: I did took the Principles of analysis, after I've finished that one with Lay, and did quite well.)
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|