

Mathematical Book Reviews - dedalus
http://www.cs.umd.edu/~gasarch/bookrev/bookrev.html

======
minopret
The Book Review Column edited by William Gasarch seems to include a rather
large proportional of books that, given a suitable undergraduate-level
background, a person can hope simply to enjoy. A person can hope to grow with
them, rather than climb them. I look forward to flipping through these reviews
to see, will I indeed enjoy this or that?

Now, I have read only a small portion of math books. But, Protter and Morrey,
Dummit and Foote, books by Strang, books by Rudin? Isn't this quite a
different category? Sure, many mathematical books are books we should note,
books we should collect, books we should teach. If you are the kind of person
who sits around chewing and digesting such books, congratulations. But then,
haven't you probably read all the reviews that you need already?

Edit: Whoops! Now I think that my perception is quite biased because a) many
books that he reviews don't require much more than excellent high-school
mathematics skills and b) I personally enjoy math books more that are more
closely related to computation. Gasarch's book review column is written for
SIGACT, ACM's Special Interest Group on Algorithms and Computation Theory.
Still, my point was that this list of math books is not so much like some
other lists of math books.

~~~
VLM
I think the authors opinion is interesting. I looked up the review for
Analytic Combinatorics and the author suggests going into some depth would
take about three semesters. The Coursera MOOC is of course six weeks long and
probably not in as much depth. Interesting.

------
stiff
If you are into things like this, I also recommend:

[http://www.cargalmathbooks.com/](http://www.cargalmathbooks.com/)

~~~
Lyaserkiev
Extra resources:

[http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~abhishek/chicmath.htm](http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~abhishek/chicmath.htm)
[http://math-blog.com/mathematics-books/](http://math-blog.com/mathematics-
books/)

