|
|
|
|
|
by vkazanov
1031 days ago
|
|
I have both the book discussed here, and How to prove it, and back in the day the Proof book was a revelation, unlike Polya's one, which was interesting but that's about it How to prove it just made proofs click, and I wish I understood the material earlier, by high school the latest. I am convinced that all the half intuitive half ("kind of like") mechanical ("just remember this") explanations we get in school and undergrad years are a huge waste of everyone's time. |
|
Some titles that come up are:
Mathematical Proofs: A transition to Advanced Mathematics by Chartrand, Polimeni and Zhang.
Book of Proof: Richard Hammack
Jay Cumming’s Proofs
I remember I once had a book that advertised itself as a book on Discrete Mathematics but it turned out to be more in line with the titles above, was a gem, if I find it I'll let you know.
But it's nice to see I'm not the only guy who gets a kick out of this stuff.
I wouldn't bother with things from the foundations of mathematics area, like Russel or Frege and whoever else came from that era, back when people still wrote an 800 page treatise on what a "number" even is. A lot of the material coming from that period seems to have been thrown down the drain.