#Book #Review: "#Projective #Geometry. Solved #Problems and #Theory Review"
Projective Geometry. Solved Problems and Theory Review
by Elisabetta Fortuna, Roberto Frigerio and Rita Pardini
Springer, 2016
http://www.springer.com/us/book/9783319428239
I like very much this book. It isn't a complete treatise on the subject of Projective Geometry, but it gives a quite extended overview of this complex subject in its 60-pages long first chapter. The language is rigorous but at the same time, the authors try to make it understandable to the average scientist with a reasonable mathematical background.
It doesn't have a bibliography, but that's because it is not necessary. The reader is directed to one standard classical textbook, where he or she will be able to find any missing information as well as a bibliography. For the rest of the content, the book is self-consistent, because it gives more than 200 fully-solved exercises (sometimes also in different and complementary ways) collected in three chapters: Projective Spaces, Curves and Hypersurfaces, and finally Conics and Quadrics.
The approach is "learning by doing", but the exercises span a very wide range of complexity, from the quite simple to the very complex ones, and each one can help to understand and familiarize with specific parts of the subject. Furthermore, the exercises are often referenced in the first chapter, which gives a very helpful link between theory and practice.
It is possible that somebody would criticize this book by saying that it is not complete and that the reader would need to buy another, more theoretical text too. The authors anticipate this objection by writing in the preface that "This is not one further textbook, in particular it has not been conceived for sequential reading from the first to the last page; rather it aims to complement a standard textbook, accompanying the reader in her/his journey through the subject according to the philosophy of “learning by doing”." I second this statement and suggest a further one. Can the textbooks based on a pure theoretical exposition be considered complete? Shouldn't the reader be advised to buy a book like this to get a real and full understanding of the subject?
by Elisabetta Fortuna, Roberto Frigerio and Rita Pardini
Springer, 2016
http://www.springer.com/us/book/9783319428239
It doesn't have a bibliography, but that's because it is not necessary. The reader is directed to one standard classical textbook, where he or she will be able to find any missing information as well as a bibliography. For the rest of the content, the book is self-consistent, because it gives more than 200 fully-solved exercises (sometimes also in different and complementary ways) collected in three chapters: Projective Spaces, Curves and Hypersurfaces, and finally Conics and Quadrics.
The approach is "learning by doing", but the exercises span a very wide range of complexity, from the quite simple to the very complex ones, and each one can help to understand and familiarize with specific parts of the subject. Furthermore, the exercises are often referenced in the first chapter, which gives a very helpful link between theory and practice.
It is possible that somebody would criticize this book by saying that it is not complete and that the reader would need to buy another, more theoretical text too. The authors anticipate this objection by writing in the preface that "This is not one further textbook, in particular it has not been conceived for sequential reading from the first to the last page; rather it aims to complement a standard textbook, accompanying the reader in her/his journey through the subject according to the philosophy of “learning by doing”." I second this statement and suggest a further one. Can the textbooks based on a pure theoretical exposition be considered complete? Shouldn't the reader be advised to buy a book like this to get a real and full understanding of the subject?
Commenti
Posta un commento