4

I am looking for comprehensive and rigorous textbooks on precalculus that provide proof for all the formulas and theorems they mention. You can suggest multiple books on different topics like trigonometry, algebra, and geometry.
I am aware that there are similar questions on this website but this question distinguishes from them mainly by the requirement of rigorousness.

bonsoir
  • 167

1 Answers1

13

$\text{Hello Bonsoir.}$ I will try to answer your question. But let me first say that you ask a difficult one, because I've found there is unfortunately a dearth of well-written rigorous high school textbooks in English. As Dave Renfro alluded to in the comments, there are the American "New Math" textbooks of the 1960s, but the emphasis on logical formalism in them is not matched by interesting substantive mathematics. Then there are the late 19th and early 20th century British textbooks (and a few American ones that emulate them), but these have their own serious problems. The "Art of Problem Solving" textbooks have been mentioned, but from what I've seen of them, they also have significant shortcomings (though I think their problem books are much better).

So as regards learning the basics, an English reader would do well not to dwell too much on trying to find a perfect textbook. A better strategy is to use a decent, but not necessarily comprehensive, main textbook and rely on various kinds of supplementary reading to round out their knowledge. There are many excellent books in English that are meant to supplement, rather than replace, a basic algebra textbook.

Therefore, for a basic algebra textbook, I have only a couple of rather pedestrian recommendations to make, both authored by mathematicians. They also cover basic trigonometry.

  • Basic Mathematics by Serge Lang
  • Algebra and Trigonometry by Sheldon Axler

In trigonometry, it would be reasonable but not strictly necessary to use a second source, such as:

  • Elementary Trigonometry by Durell (see here)
  • Trigonometry by Gelfand and Saul (This is in the same collection as the other books of Gelfand's that I mention below, but it is much closer to an ordinary textbook than they are.)

(Edit: You mentioned that Lang didn't go far enough in trigonometry. A good book that carries trigonometry further roughly from the point where Lang leaves off would be Trigonometry by Nobbs. But there is little there that is not covered in Parsonson's books - see below.)

For geometry, please have a look at the answer here. (There is also the wonderful, but very hard Lessons in Geometry by Hadamard, the first volume of which now has an English translation. This might be best reserved for a second pass through elementary geometry, if you want one.)

If you have a genuine interest in mathematics, you will want to supplement your reading with various other books for these reasons: (1) to further explore topics in elementary math; (2) to work on harder problems; (3) to improve your ability to write proofs. I think this is very helpful if you intend to learn calculus from a rigorous book like Spivak or Apostol.

It is impossible to be comprehensive on what good supplementary reading would be, but I would recommend reading these books of Gelfand's alongside the basic textbook: Algebra, The Method of Coordinates, Functions and Graphs (the second coming before the third).

Also consider working through some of nos. 1, 3, 15, 19, 20, 34 in the Anneli Lax New Mathematical Library. This series is aimed at bright high schoolers particularly interested in mathematics.

Finally, I'd like to recommend the books Pure Mathematics I, II by Parsonson. They were written to cover the entire A-level math curriculum - apart from calculus - in England in the 1970s. This means everything a candidate for Cambridge or Oxford would have been expected to know, except calculus. They have hard problems, and can be considered something of a "one-stop shop" for the standard non-calculus subjects that are not always included in more elementary books: vector geometry, more advanced analytic trigonometry, combinatorics and probability, matrices and basic linear algebra, complex numbers and polynomials, partial fractions, conic sections and quadric surfaces. The preface to the first volume says that it supposes the student is simultaneously studying calculus, but in practice I've found that calculus is rarely needed except in some of the more advanced probability chapters. It is certainly reasonable to read at least the first volume before starting calculus. It should be accessible after about the first 14 chapters of Lang's Basic Mathematics.

Added: There is one topic that is regarded as already known in Parsonson that might be worth looking at in another book at a higher level than Lang or Axler. That is exponential and logarithmic functions. For example, the following American precalculus books have chapters on this: Pre-Calculus Mathematics by Shanks et al., The Elementary Functions by Fleenor et al., Elementary Functions and Coordinate Geometry by Hu, Advanced Mathematics by Coxford and Payne. While these books are good within their genre - and I would prefer them to the more commonly recommended books by Dolciani or Allendoerfer - I would emphasize that apart from the one issue with exponential functions, I feel these are inferior alternatives to Parsonson for a reader of high ability.

There are also some algebra textbooks that treat algebra at a higher level than Parsonson (but without being about abstract algebra). These could supplement parts of the second volume of Parsonson: Higher Algebra by Ferrar and Introduction to Higher Algebra by Mostowski and Stark.

Anonymous
  • 416
  • Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. – Aloizio Macedo Jun 24 '20 at 10:19
  • I could have added the following possibility as an alternative to Lang: Algebra and Analysis of Elementary Functions, by Potapov, Alexandrov and Pasichenko. There's a preview of the Spanish version on archive.org. It's more rigorous than Lang, though not perfectly rigorous. For example, it defines real numbers and the operations on them, but stops short of proving the properties of the operations. Unfortunately, there are far too many computational problems. Apart from the greater rigor in a handful of places, I feel Parsonson and Ferrar do a better job of teaching computation intelligently. – Anonymous Jul 20 '20 at 22:23
  • Where can I find a pdf of this book? I was unable to find it on Amazon, libgen and archive.org – bonsoir Jul 21 '20 at 16:19
  • Ferrar has a discussion of abstract algebra which I think is too advanced for me right now and I think it is better to learn from a modern book on abstract algebra as I think the notations have changed a lot since that book was written. – bonsoir Jul 21 '20 at 16:22
  • Which algebra book of Ferrar's are you talking about? He wrote three I know about: Higher Algebra for Schools, Higher Algebra: A Sequel to Higher Algebra for Schools, and Algebra: A Textbook of Matrices, Determinants and Algebraic Forms. I'm not recommending the third book at all. The first one is at the level of Parsonson I and the second is roughly at the level of Parsonson II, but somewhat harder. What I had in mind was using the second one in conjunction with Parsonson II (or as a substitute for some parts of it), once you get to that point. For the book by Potapov... – Anonymous Jul 21 '20 at 17:15
  • search for Potapov algebra on Libgen or archive.org, and it should come up. The first two books by Ferrar don't have online versions that I know of. – Anonymous Jul 21 '20 at 17:16
  • If you can figure out a way to buy it from Turkey, they're selling it for $1.50 here. Here are a few libraries that have it. https://www.worldcat.org/title/algebra-and-analysis-of-elementary-functions/oclc/923533831 – Anonymous Jul 21 '20 at 17:39
  • Also here: https://www.booklooker.de/app/detail.php?id=A02k5jXS01ZZ8 Anyway, as I said, I think there are better choices. – Anonymous Jul 21 '20 at 17:46
  • Actually, I was wrong. It seems Ferrar's first two algebra books were uploaded to archive.org last year: Higher Algebra for Schools and Higher Algebra. You need to register with archive.org to "borrow" them, and you can't download them. – Anonymous Jul 21 '20 at 18:42
  • You asked about alternatives to Kiselev that assume prior knowledge of basic Euclidean geometry. I don't think that Kiselev assumes prior knowledge. It's just that the problems in it are harder than in most American textbooks. If you can find A School Geometry by Forder, the problems are at a similar level to Kiselev by the end of the book. Forder's book has a sequel, Higher Course Geometry, which is also very good. At a higher level than Forder is Hadamard's Lessons in Geometry, of which only the first volume has an English translation. Honestly, if you're happy with Kiselev, then you... – Anonymous Jul 21 '20 at 20:39
  • should continue with Kiselev. Mathematically speaking, it's a good book. You just need to bear in mind what I said about the English. That can be remedied by looking very superficially at other geometry books if you have any concerns about the way something is phrased, to see how it's usually expressed. – Anonymous Jul 21 '20 at 20:41
  • If you're looking for an advanced book on Euclidean geometry, aimed at someone who has mastered the content of, say, Kiselev or Forder's first book, I know there are a lot of choices, but I don't have first hand experience with most of them. The two I know in English are Coxeter's Geometry Revisited and Forder's sequel. College Geometry by Altshiller-Court is often recommended, but I don't know it well. Instead of reading a more advanced textbook, you could also work through problem books such as Sharygin's Problems in Plane Geometry and Problems in Solid Geometry. – Anonymous Jul 21 '20 at 20:52
  • But I think outside of contest preparation, this type of "advanced" Euclidean geometry isn't for everybody. Instead of that, one could study one of the various more specialized areas of geometry. For most people, this will be less of a priority than learning basic analysis and abstract algebra. – Anonymous Jul 21 '20 at 20:58
  • @Anonymous any alternatives to Pure Mathematics? – bonsoir Jul 22 '20 at 00:58
  • Shall we move this to chat so we don't get in trouble? – Anonymous Jul 22 '20 at 01:09
  • The alternative would probably be to find a book on each individual topic. Apart from probability, which can be delayed if you want, I think vector geometry (as a prerequisite to linear algebra), complex numbers and some theory of equations are really important to learn about before moving on to mathematics more advanced than Spivak. Elementary linear algebra can be postponed, but conic sections are worth studying at this stage. There are alternatives to Parsonson for all of these things, but the problems in Parsonson are good and at a relatively high level of difficulty (but below... – Anonymous Jul 22 '20 at 01:26
  • Olympiad level. Do you have any concerns about Parsonson? – Anonymous Jul 22 '20 at 01:26
  • About your question on a "modern" trigonometry book: another option is Trigonometry by Nobbs. The geometric parts won't be at the same level of difficulty as Durell and Hobson, but it has some interesting content. – Anonymous Jul 22 '20 at 14:37
  • @Anonymous what is your opinion on Elementary and Advanced trigonometry by Miller – bonsoir Jul 22 '20 at 16:32
  • Looking at it superficially, I'd say it looks like a reasonable choice. But there are portions of Part 2 that make essential use of calculus. – Anonymous Jul 22 '20 at 17:51
  • I've had a closer look at the book by Hobson. I have to say I may have been prejudiced by the book's age. I no longer have the same concerns I had about rigor. As long as the problems aren't too difficult for you, it looks like it could be a good book to study from, probably better than Durell. – Anonymous Jul 23 '20 at 04:03
  • While I don't have the same concerns about rigor, I think the risk of Hobson being too difficult is real. You should be attentive to this and be prepared to choose a less difficult book if you need to. I think there's much that's interesting there, but it depends on having a very high degree of algebraic skill. – Anonymous Jul 23 '20 at 12:53
  • @Anonymous I will keep note of that while reading Hobson. Thank you. – bonsoir Jul 24 '20 at 06:37
  • @bonsoir Hi, same Anonymous here. How are you getting on? – Anonymous Mar 20 '21 at 04:19
  • Hi! I'm working through spivak right now (about to finish chapter 3) – bonsoir Mar 20 '21 at 15:49
  • That's great! Glad to see you've moved on to Spivak. I think that kind of book can really move you forward. What did you end up doing about algebra, geometry and trigonometry? – Anonymous Mar 20 '21 at 17:35
  • I just used Lang for algebra and geometry as I had already done Gelfand (I completed the whole of basic mathematics) and for trigonometry I just used the standard ncert textbooks for higher classes at my school. – bonsoir Mar 21 '21 at 07:18
  • Do you remember how to open a chat? I'd like to ask you how it's going with Spivak. – Anonymous Mar 21 '21 at 07:20
  • It seems like I'd have to create a public chat room and I cannot invite so you have to find it yourself. Should I? – bonsoir Mar 21 '21 at 08:28
  • Yes, if you can do that. – Anonymous Mar 21 '21 at 08:46
  • Find the chat room with the name 'bonsoir's room' and join it. – bonsoir Mar 21 '21 at 08:49
  • If you're still on the site, how are things going now? – Anonymous Aug 23 '21 at 01:00