Books written similar fashion to the book of Munkres, Analysis on Manifolds, on any subject

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
6
down vote

favorite
2












Question:



I'm looking for writers and their books that are written in similar fashion to the book of Munkres Analsis on Manifolds. In other words, books with the properties (or at least with a subset of them);



  • not-terse proofs,

  • readable

  • short list of exercises (if possible; optional)

  • pedagogically written

  • states motivations explicitly

  • Rigorous

  • Non introductory text

Note that, I'm not looking for such books in a specific subject; the book can be on any subject.



Also note that, most of the time, texts for undergraduates has the smell of an "introduction" text, which I do not want to spend time because I'm just bored, so I would appreciate if you just constraint yourself to the graduate text / texts with serious analysis of its subject.



Edit:



There are already lots of posts on subjects that are looking for "best" book on various subjects, and this post does not asks which book that you are thinking is the best book on the subject x. Because of that reason, please do not post any book that is "good" unless you really think that it satisfies the above properties (if it satisfies only a subset of those properties, then please specify)




reference-request soft-question book-recommendation




share|cite|improve this question

























    up vote
    6
    down vote

    favorite
    2












    Question:



    I'm looking for writers and their books that are written in similar fashion to the book of Munkres Analsis on Manifolds. In other words, books with the properties (or at least with a subset of them);



    • not-terse proofs,

    • readable

    • short list of exercises (if possible; optional)

    • pedagogically written

    • states motivations explicitly

    • Rigorous

    • Non introductory text

    Note that, I'm not looking for such books in a specific subject; the book can be on any subject.



    Also note that, most of the time, texts for undergraduates has the smell of an "introduction" text, which I do not want to spend time because I'm just bored, so I would appreciate if you just constraint yourself to the graduate text / texts with serious analysis of its subject.



    Edit:



    There are already lots of posts on subjects that are looking for "best" book on various subjects, and this post does not asks which book that you are thinking is the best book on the subject x. Because of that reason, please do not post any book that is "good" unless you really think that it satisfies the above properties (if it satisfies only a subset of those properties, then please specify)




    reference-request soft-question book-recommendation




    share|cite|improve this question























      up vote
      6
      down vote

      favorite
      2









      up vote
      6
      down vote

      favorite
      2






      2





      Question:



      I'm looking for writers and their books that are written in similar fashion to the book of Munkres Analsis on Manifolds. In other words, books with the properties (or at least with a subset of them);



      • not-terse proofs,

      • readable

      • short list of exercises (if possible; optional)

      • pedagogically written

      • states motivations explicitly

      • Rigorous

      • Non introductory text

      Note that, I'm not looking for such books in a specific subject; the book can be on any subject.



      Also note that, most of the time, texts for undergraduates has the smell of an "introduction" text, which I do not want to spend time because I'm just bored, so I would appreciate if you just constraint yourself to the graduate text / texts with serious analysis of its subject.



      Edit:



      There are already lots of posts on subjects that are looking for "best" book on various subjects, and this post does not asks which book that you are thinking is the best book on the subject x. Because of that reason, please do not post any book that is "good" unless you really think that it satisfies the above properties (if it satisfies only a subset of those properties, then please specify)




      reference-request soft-question book-recommendation




      share|cite|improve this question













      Question:



      I'm looking for writers and their books that are written in similar fashion to the book of Munkres Analsis on Manifolds. In other words, books with the properties (or at least with a subset of them);



      • not-terse proofs,

      • readable

      • short list of exercises (if possible; optional)

      • pedagogically written

      • states motivations explicitly

      • Rigorous

      • Non introductory text

      Note that, I'm not looking for such books in a specific subject; the book can be on any subject.



      Also note that, most of the time, texts for undergraduates has the smell of an "introduction" text, which I do not want to spend time because I'm just bored, so I would appreciate if you just constraint yourself to the graduate text / texts with serious analysis of its subject.



      Edit:



      There are already lots of posts on subjects that are looking for "best" book on various subjects, and this post does not asks which book that you are thinking is the best book on the subject x. Because of that reason, please do not post any book that is "good" unless you really think that it satisfies the above properties (if it satisfies only a subset of those properties, then please specify)





      reference-request soft-question book-recommendation





      share|cite|improve this question












      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Aug 12 at 15:41
























      asked Aug 6 at 3:17









      onurcanbektas

      3,1091834




      3,1091834




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          2
          down vote













          I am a fan of George Simmons' Introduction to Topology and Modern Analysis, and it seems to cover all your criteria.



          The proofs are not terse, it is eminently readable and contains lots of motivation for the topics it covers. Each section ends with a short list of exercises, and it has remarkably few typos. If you are not interested in the introductory part then you can skip directly to the second chapter and later. Simmons covers a wide range of topics in this book.



          Another recommendation of mine would be Tristan Needham's Visual Complex Analysis. If you have been introduced to complex analysis already, then this is a great book to polish your insights. Don't be deceived by the casual tone of the author; this book is a gold mine of geometric insights.






          share|cite|improve this answer



















          • 1




            Needham is not rigorous. This appears to be a strength of the book, though, rather than a weakness, at least if you already know some complex analysis.
            – Theoretical Economist
            Aug 6 at 14:02






          • 1




            I agree. I should have mentioned that Needham isn't rigorous. He does tick all the other boxes, in my opinion :)
            – Brahadeesh
            Aug 6 at 14:05










          Your Answer




          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          );
          );
          , "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: false,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );








           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2873557%2fbooks-written-similar-fashion-to-the-book-of-munkres-analysis-on-manifolds-on%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest

















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          2
          down vote













          I am a fan of George Simmons' Introduction to Topology and Modern Analysis, and it seems to cover all your criteria.



          The proofs are not terse, it is eminently readable and contains lots of motivation for the topics it covers. Each section ends with a short list of exercises, and it has remarkably few typos. If you are not interested in the introductory part then you can skip directly to the second chapter and later. Simmons covers a wide range of topics in this book.



          Another recommendation of mine would be Tristan Needham's Visual Complex Analysis. If you have been introduced to complex analysis already, then this is a great book to polish your insights. Don't be deceived by the casual tone of the author; this book is a gold mine of geometric insights.






          share|cite|improve this answer



















          • 1




            Needham is not rigorous. This appears to be a strength of the book, though, rather than a weakness, at least if you already know some complex analysis.
            – Theoretical Economist
            Aug 6 at 14:02






          • 1




            I agree. I should have mentioned that Needham isn't rigorous. He does tick all the other boxes, in my opinion :)
            – Brahadeesh
            Aug 6 at 14:05














          up vote
          2
          down vote













          I am a fan of George Simmons' Introduction to Topology and Modern Analysis, and it seems to cover all your criteria.



          The proofs are not terse, it is eminently readable and contains lots of motivation for the topics it covers. Each section ends with a short list of exercises, and it has remarkably few typos. If you are not interested in the introductory part then you can skip directly to the second chapter and later. Simmons covers a wide range of topics in this book.



          Another recommendation of mine would be Tristan Needham's Visual Complex Analysis. If you have been introduced to complex analysis already, then this is a great book to polish your insights. Don't be deceived by the casual tone of the author; this book is a gold mine of geometric insights.






          share|cite|improve this answer



















          • 1




            Needham is not rigorous. This appears to be a strength of the book, though, rather than a weakness, at least if you already know some complex analysis.
            – Theoretical Economist
            Aug 6 at 14:02






          • 1




            I agree. I should have mentioned that Needham isn't rigorous. He does tick all the other boxes, in my opinion :)
            – Brahadeesh
            Aug 6 at 14:05












          up vote
          2
          down vote










          up vote
          2
          down vote









          I am a fan of George Simmons' Introduction to Topology and Modern Analysis, and it seems to cover all your criteria.



          The proofs are not terse, it is eminently readable and contains lots of motivation for the topics it covers. Each section ends with a short list of exercises, and it has remarkably few typos. If you are not interested in the introductory part then you can skip directly to the second chapter and later. Simmons covers a wide range of topics in this book.



          Another recommendation of mine would be Tristan Needham's Visual Complex Analysis. If you have been introduced to complex analysis already, then this is a great book to polish your insights. Don't be deceived by the casual tone of the author; this book is a gold mine of geometric insights.






          share|cite|improve this answer















          I am a fan of George Simmons' Introduction to Topology and Modern Analysis, and it seems to cover all your criteria.



          The proofs are not terse, it is eminently readable and contains lots of motivation for the topics it covers. Each section ends with a short list of exercises, and it has remarkably few typos. If you are not interested in the introductory part then you can skip directly to the second chapter and later. Simmons covers a wide range of topics in this book.



          Another recommendation of mine would be Tristan Needham's Visual Complex Analysis. If you have been introduced to complex analysis already, then this is a great book to polish your insights. Don't be deceived by the casual tone of the author; this book is a gold mine of geometric insights.







          share|cite|improve this answer















          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Aug 6 at 13:46


























          answered Aug 6 at 13:39









          Brahadeesh

          3,74931449




          3,74931449







          • 1




            Needham is not rigorous. This appears to be a strength of the book, though, rather than a weakness, at least if you already know some complex analysis.
            – Theoretical Economist
            Aug 6 at 14:02






          • 1




            I agree. I should have mentioned that Needham isn't rigorous. He does tick all the other boxes, in my opinion :)
            – Brahadeesh
            Aug 6 at 14:05












          • 1




            Needham is not rigorous. This appears to be a strength of the book, though, rather than a weakness, at least if you already know some complex analysis.
            – Theoretical Economist
            Aug 6 at 14:02






          • 1




            I agree. I should have mentioned that Needham isn't rigorous. He does tick all the other boxes, in my opinion :)
            – Brahadeesh
            Aug 6 at 14:05







          1




          1




          Needham is not rigorous. This appears to be a strength of the book, though, rather than a weakness, at least if you already know some complex analysis.
          – Theoretical Economist
          Aug 6 at 14:02




          Needham is not rigorous. This appears to be a strength of the book, though, rather than a weakness, at least if you already know some complex analysis.
          – Theoretical Economist
          Aug 6 at 14:02




          1




          1




          I agree. I should have mentioned that Needham isn't rigorous. He does tick all the other boxes, in my opinion :)
          – Brahadeesh
          Aug 6 at 14:05




          I agree. I should have mentioned that Needham isn't rigorous. He does tick all the other boxes, in my opinion :)
          – Brahadeesh
          Aug 6 at 14:05












           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


























           


          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2873557%2fbooks-written-similar-fashion-to-the-book-of-munkres-analysis-on-manifolds-on%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest
































































          Comments

          Post a Comment

          Popular posts from this blog

          What is the equation of a 3D cone with generalised tilt?

          Image
          Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP up vote 2 down vote favorite What is the equation of a 3D cone with generalized tilt? I've noticed that in most equations given to represent a cone, there is no parameter which defines the tilt of the cone in 3D space and that most of them have their point at the origin $(0,0,0)$ - I was wondering if anyone could give me a more generalized cone equation for a cone in any position in 3D space 3d share | cite | improve this question edited Jul 25 '16 at 0:05 ervx 9,425 3 13 36 asked Jul 24 '16 at 15:38 Charlene 11 2 2 Welcome to Math.SE! Could you please explain a few things to help people give an answer useful to you: 1. What do you mean by "generalized tilt"? 2. Are you asking about a right circular cone? Does the angle at the vertex matter? 3. What form of answer (implicit, parametric...?) are you looking for? 4. If this is homework, what tools do you have available, an...
          Read more

          Color the edges and diagonals of a regular polygon

          Image
          Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP up vote 5 down vote favorite 1 Here is the problem: For what $n$ is it possible to color the edges and diagonals of an $n$-side regular polygon with $dfracbinomn23$ colors, such that you use every color exactly three times and for every color the three segments (edges or diagonals) with that color form a triangle? Trivially $nequiv 0 text or 1 pmod3$. I can also prove that if the statement is true for $k$ than it is true for $3k$ as well. How to finish? Please help! Thanks combinatorial-geometry share | cite | improve this question edited Aug 6 at 21:57 alcana 118 4 asked Aug 6 at 21:15 Leo Gardner 356 11 Even assuming "polyhpn" in the title is a typo for polygon , it is unclear what you mean by "the edges and sides". Aren't the side of a regular polygon the same as the edges? A regular $n$-sided polygon has $n$ edges. – hardmath Aug 6 at 21:20 3 $n$ ne...
          Read more

          Relationship between determinant of matrix and determinant of adjoint?

          Image
          Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP up vote 2 down vote favorite We are studying adjoints in class, and I was curious if there is a relationship between the determinant of matrix A, and the determinant of the adjoint of matrix A? I assume there would be a relationship because finding the adjoint requires creating a cofactor matrix and then transposing it. linear-algebra determinant adjoint-operators share | cite | improve this question asked Nov 17 '17 at 17:32 CluelessCoder 32 5 For a square matrix $A$ of order $n$, we have $A(operatornameadj A)=(operatornameadj A)A=|A|I_n$ where $I_n$ is the identity matrix of order $n$. This should tell you about the determinant of the adjoint in terms of that of $A$ (use multiplicative property and other elementary properties of determinants). – Prasun Biswas Nov 17 '17 at 17:35 1 @CluelessCoder: see here: math.stackexchange.com/questions/516127/…...
          Read more