If you look for optimal you are going to spend more time looking for that textbook than learning.
The optimal solution is to find a good enough textbook and start as soon as possible to learn and tonstop procrastinating.
The optimal solution is to find a good enough textbook and start as soon as possible to learn and tonstop procrastinating.
In my experience, focusing on a single, good-enough course (when in doubt, go for a famous/respected author/field contributor) and looking for other sources once in a while, has been the best approach.
Many examples:
- It's easier to research the "best textbook for me" than it is to study and do problems.
- It's easier to read about the optimal periodization cycle while sitting on the couch than it is to go sweat in gym.
- It's easier to read about dieting (it must be the best diet for meee!) than it is to just stop ordering pizza.
- It's easier to order business cards and redesign your logo than it is to find customers.
- It's easier to fiddle with your vim config than it is sit down and write code.
Unless you are already in top 10%, focusing on optimality is a distraction.
There are certainly good and bad textbooks, and a book good for many people might be unsuitable for your style, your goals, and your background. But there are plenty of good enough textbooks, trudging through any of them will yield far more benefits than getting that ideal book.
You know, there is a textbook for Linear Algebra that's literally titled "Linear Algebra Done Right". It's pretty much what it says on the tin.
> This best-selling textbook for a second course in linear algebra is aimed at undergraduate math majors and graduate students.
> No prerequisites are assumed other than the usual demand for suitable mathematical maturity.
Surely the optimal solution would be to spend a few hours / days in the first week picking the textbook, then 51 weeks studying it, as opposed to literally picking the first one you see and studying it for 52 weeks.