Timeline for Reading materials for mathematical logic
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 24, 2010 at 2:32 | comment | added | John Stillwell | I second the choice of Wolf's book. It is more current than most of the other suggestions, and it integrates set theory with logic, which is important IMO. I also recommend Mendelson, if only for his appendix with the Gentzten-Schuette proof of the consistency of arithmetic by transfinite induction. (Very few logic books include this.) | |
| Jul 24, 2010 at 2:27 | history | edited | John Stillwell | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
Minor corrections to spacing and wording; added 1 characters in body
|
| Jul 23, 2010 at 22:51 | comment | added | The Mathemagician | @Andy,Qiaochu Your points are noted and I toned it down accordingly.I hope I do find a book even better someday,Andy-not only does it mean people are still attempting to improve on existing texts,it means I'm still open minded enough to accept someone from a younger generation's take on the subject.That's something all of us need to strive for later in our lives. Qiaochu-I was very impressed with the book and would expect any student who could handle Shoenfield or any of the other books recommended here to find it much easier and more enjoyable.This is really nitpicking on your part,I'm sorry. | |
| Jul 23, 2010 at 18:39 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan | @Andrew: you are free to say "I love this book"; these are statements about your response to it. What I am annoyed by are your statements about other people's responses to it. You can't predict how other people respond to the book - maybe some people will find it too hard, or too easy. You also can't overlook the possibility that you might someday find a book you like even better and/or that is even better suited for the OP. | |
| Jul 23, 2010 at 18:28 | comment | added | Andy Putman | @Andrew L : I removed the downvote. I'm not "punishing" you for writing something nice about a book you like. Rather, I'm trying to convince you to write in a style that conforms to the usual professional standards of mathematics. This style avoids hyperbole, sticks to the facts, and avoids unnecessary personal digressions. I suspect that people would receive your opinions better if you wrote in this style. I suppose you have to decide what is more important to you : "expressing yourself" or getting people to take your opinions seriously. | |
| Jul 23, 2010 at 18:17 | history | edited | The Mathemagician | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
deleted 37 characters in body
|
| Jul 23, 2010 at 18:12 | history | edited | The Mathemagician | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
deleted 309 characters in body
|
| Jul 23, 2010 at 18:07 | comment | added | The Mathemagician | @Andy So now it offends you that I really liked a book and wrote something very nice about it?!?And you're punishing me to force me to remove them.Fine.I give up.I can't win. | |
| Jul 23, 2010 at 17:00 | comment | added | Andy Putman | -1 for the absurd levels of hyperbole in this answer. Tone it down and I'll remove this downvote. | |
| Jul 23, 2010 at 16:48 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan | For "anyone"? Really? Have you asked everyone in the world for their opinion on every introduction to mathematical logic? | |
| Jul 23, 2010 at 16:27 | history | answered | The Mathemagician | CC BY-SA 2.5 |