>>11744213>Not real. Just say differential Calculus if you know what that is, and Integral Calculus if you are familiar with that as well. I know how to take derivatives/integrals/volume on a plane between curves, etc., I don't know how to do series and such things.
>If you are capable of constructing mathematical proofs then something like Lax's Linear Algebra and its ApplicationsI'm not great at proving but I have gotten much better and I want to work on it, so I may pick this up
>the book by Serge LangI'm reading Basic Mathematics and it's very well written, but I also read some of his First Course In Calculus and quite a bit of it was weirdly explained and there was at least one mistake I caught in the exercises. Is his LinAlg book better?
>If you are only capable of computational math, which if I recall is all they have taught you in AP calcI didn't take AP Calc, I only ever took the test and learned on my own, meaning I had a much better grasp on the theory behind everything and a few of the more important proofs. Computation math is for bugmen and low IQ pseuds.
What's the difference between Serge Lang's introductory and regular LinAlg book? I might end up using that, if not Lax's book (does Lax sacrifice rigor for application, in comparison to Lang's book?). Also, sorry for all the questions, but what would I go through after these "introductory" texts, do I go straight into abstract algebra or is there more advanced LinAlg first?
