Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by wodenokoto | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

wodenokoto

Last night I was looking into what to read after or along with 3Blue1Brown's series of Linear algebra videos [1]

The contenders seems to be:

- Linear Algebra Done Right - Sheldon Axler

- Liner Algebra Done Wrong - Sergei Treil

- Introduction to Linea Algebra - Gilbert Strang

- Introduction to Applied Linear Algebra: Vectors, Matrices, and Least Squares by Stephen Boyd and Lieven Vandenberghe

[1] https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZHQObOWTQDPD3MizzM2x...

View on HN

As a math educator, I strongly dislike both Strang and Axler for a 1st course. I've heard great things about Strang's lectures, but his book is disorganized and too heavy on computation. Axler's book is wonderful, but as explicitly stated on the back cover, it's designed for a 2nd course and primarily aimed at math majors.

I recommend and teach my YouTube Live series out of Fraleigh [1], but unfortunately it's out of print. Lay seems to be a good modern alternative.

[1] https://linear.mathcanbeahobby.com

Apparently, it's on Internet Archive: https://archive.org/details/linearalgebra0000fral/

Appears only the front-matter of the book is available on IA (limited preview); the content was omitted.

agree, tried both and they are hard as a starter.

It may simply be that linear algebra is a difficult topic to become introduced to, and even the best teaching tools cannot make it easy.

Hard disagree. Linear algebra is one of the easiest topics in mathematics. In my experience, 3Blue1Brown videos are a great simple introduction. Beyond that, Kostrikin’s books.

What do you think of the other Fraleigh books?

Strang's OCW lectures are fantastic. His voice rings "combinations of columns" in my head almost ten years later whenever I do a matrix or matrix-vector multiply on paper. I found the textbook was a good accompaniment for the lecture course, but maybe not a good book to use on its own for self-study. (IIRC, when following the lectures, you jump around the chapters a bit out of order [or, you read the chapters non-linearly]. So the disorganized thing may be true.)

I agree Strang is awful, the department I taught in used Fraleigh/Lay in the past. I used a book by A.O. Morris.

We used Lay as well, it's still behind me on the shelf there. I haven't done much comparison but it would be interesting to revisit these and see if I can make them stick better. Everything always feels familiar but I wouldn't really be able to use or explain many of the techniques given e.g. a blank piece of paper.

I found Linear Algebra by Friedberg, Insel and Spence to be excellent. Very clear, modern notation, great exercises. It's also what Tao lectured from in 115A: https://www.math.ucla.edu/~tao/resource/general/115a.3.02f/

+1 I loved FIS for my Advanced Linear Algebra class

FIS was the text for my first “real” mathematics class and it is near and dear to me.

I ended up getting a math PhD so it must have done somethings right!

Yes, it was absolutely great! It's a good mix of theory and computation.

Since it doesn't neglect computation, it's great as an introductory text.

After that, and some other math courses you can move on to Linear Algebra Done Right.

The thing about linear algebra is that it isn't really a cohesive subject in the same way that calc is. This is why you get as many perspectives as you get commenters.

There are some central concepts, and which ones matter to you depends on what you're planning to do with your future. The key points are:

* Matrices/vectors as grids of numbers/computational tools.

* Matrices/vectors as positions and transformations of those positions.

* Matrices/vectors as more abstract geometric objects

* Matrices/vectors as algebraic objects.

There is no 'done right' imo. My sense is LADW is probably the best option for a motivated honors math student, because unlike Axler the author doesn't hate determinants for whatever reason. Strang would work well for engineers. Axler is mostly concerned with the last two, but IMO this makes him kinda niche.

honestly students should just study ode's to motivate and learn linear algebra which otherwise is lacking substance, and peek into pde's to see why vector space necessary and insightful especially for nonlinear pde.

For math majors, LADR is far better than LADW, almost most of LA books use the determinant to prove the advanced stuff (diagonlaization etc), what sets LADR apart is the intentional delay of introducing determinants in order to prove (and hence understand) what's the goal behind concepts such as diagonalization, I love this method.

I first learned from self studying Finkbeiner’s “Introduction to Linear Transformations and Matrices” which I thought was very good. Great exercise's. Dover still prints it for pretty cheap. He does a cool thing introducing all sorts of theory of linear transformations, then later showing that matrices are the way to encode them once you chose basis for domain and codomain. I liked that a lot, felt like it removed any magic from matrices. Also a fan of Axler though.

Strang's lecture series are a nice and friendly accompaniment, especially if you don't have a reading group https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UJ4CFRGd-U&list=PL221E2BBF1...

LADW and LADR are great too, for an honors approach with more focus on proofs. To me it would make more sense on a second pass.

Strang is simpler and clearer. Axler is more advanced in the sense that it doesn’t tie it to matrices. Strange is a “first course” book, Axler is a second course.

Axler does limit itself to vector spaces over real and complex fields, though.

That‘s fine, but I would have appreciated notices, which proofs and theorems do not hold in the general case.

It‘s an exercise for the reader.

This is basically a request for a graduate course, though. Definitely not a first course in linear algebra.

TBH, I don’t think there are surprises in the “general case” (whatever that is… modules over a PID??) that you can’t see by understanding the real&complex situation.

No, but a second course. Still firmly in undergraduate territory, second semester at my university. Most undergraduate linear algebra textbooks also contain this, unless they are matrix computation heavy (usually for the first course).

That’s not true at all. He does precisely the thing you want him to do and also gives a pedagogical justification in the preface.

  > This book usually develops linear algebra simultaneously for real and complex vector spaces by letting  F denote either the real or the complex numbers. If you and your students prefer to think of F as an arbitrary field, then see the comments at the end of Section 1A. I prefer avoiding arbitrary fields at this level because they introduce extra abstraction without leading to any new linear algebra

And the remarks at the end of 1A are that if you want to, you can think of F as an arbitrary field everywhere except the sections on inner product spaces and where the given field is C you can frequently also use any other algebraically closed field.

Depends how you think. I found Strang impenetrable and Axler simple and lucid. Some people seem to find abstract vector spaces weird and unmotivated without doing a load of stuff with lists and grids of numbers first. I find determinants weird and unmotivated without learning exterior algebra first. I wish Axler had been my first course.

I've taught out of the first three of these. If I had to pick one for a first study, I'd vote for Strang -- and watch his videos while you go. Our second-semester mostly-math-majors linear algebra course uses Axler, which I think is nice for the purpose, but our students already have done a semester of computational stuff first. (Though the complete absence of any computations in the book means they don't always connect the material from the two courses very well.)

LADW saved me in undergrad, but I was pretty much exactly the target audience in an honors-level freshman math course:

"[per Treil, LADW is for] a student who, while not yet very familiar with abstract reasoning, is willing to study more rigorous mathematics than what is presented in a “cookbook style” calculus type course."

But yeah it's really attempting to introduce you to higher mathematics rather than get you comfortable doing linear algebra per se.

"Linear Algebra and Its Applications" by David Lay is the best introductory linear algebra textbook, hands down. Love it.

I had this as my very first textbook in community college. Loved it!

I hear recommendations for this book all the time; I've cover-to-covered Strang several times and have digested maybe 20% of Axler (I just dip into random sections of LADR when something annoys me in a problem set or whatever), and I'm super curious why the aura on Lay's book is so positive.

(I don't doubt it at all! I'm just curious.)

Lay explains things very clearly and it's very good for going back to when I need to review something. Lay covers all the foundational linear algebra topics you would need for say, ML or graphics programming. I found that roughly the first half of LADR felt like a review of what Lay covered.

You won't get anything new from Lay's book if you've done Strang. It is a basic textbook and doesn't cover anything advanced. It's just a good textbook.

As someone who's watched all Strang's lectures and read most of Axler's book, I found Linear Algebra and Its Applications to give the most interesting treatment on the topic. What made it so special was its clear explanations and the use cases it introduced.

The applications not only provided the context to get a deeper understanding of the concepts, it also made the math relevant to the real world. By showing a range of problems, from the chemical stoichiometry to the algorithmic SVD, it inspires the reader to look for more problems that can be solved with the toolset being introduced.

Axler is usually recommended as a great second book for linear algebra (unless you're extremely comfortable with proofs).

For a first exposure, these days it's hard to do better than Math Academy [0]. It'll diagnose all your weak points (including what prereqs you might not have) and handle all the scheduling using spaced repetition and knowledge about how the topics relate to each other.

All you have to do is keep showing up and do the work for 30+ minutes per day.

[0] https://www.mathacademy.com/courses/linear-algebra

I really recommend Matrix Analysis and Applied Linear Algebra by Carl Meyer. It's both concise and comprehensive. Strange is very good, but feels kinda vague and long winded in comparison (very good for a high level understanding of the tools you're dealing with)

Is this the book you are referring to? https://epubs.siam.org/doi/book/10.1137/1.9781611977448. It has 991 pages, not exactly what I would call concise.

I recommend getting the 1st edition. I read the 1st edition and loved it. Here is a relevant review of the 2nd edition https://janert.me/blog/2025/book-review-matrix-analysis-and-...

Thank you so much for the review link!! No ordinary reader would expect a complete rewrite from the first to the second edition.

Oh wow! That review was incredibly useful. I had seen there was a second edition and was eager to buy it next I came to the US - but was hesitating on dropping so much money on it.

Looks like it may be a useful read after I've mastered the first edition more :)

The FFT and SVD chapters have actually ended up being the basis of a few research projects I've done. The writing really has a way of reframing concepts in very insightful ways.

The layout of the book is very spacious,not cramped, with plenty of room for your own notes.

The nature of textbooks is that each one is better suited for a certain profile of reader. It depends a lot on the way the reader has learnt to learn things until that point in their life.

If you liked 3B1B's style, you will prefer strang over axler. Axler and treil to a greater extent focus on bringing out the abstract elegance and the kind of rigour a math major enjoys. Strang's book also has videos accompanying - on MIT OCW.

B&V VMLS on your list is interesting - they focus a lot on real-world instantiations of the concepts and have you code up things in the (excellent) exercises. Depending on your goals, you can do only this, or strang and then this. Definitely look at the exercises in any case though.

You zoomers are making a list of linear algebra books and not citing Lang? Get off my lawn ;)

Would you mind sharing your thoughts more?

Wikipedia says "The book has a pure, proof-heavy focus and is aimed at upper-division undergraduates who have been exposed to linear algebra in a prior course." [1], so it seems to be a different category of book?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_Algebra_(book)

I am a very big fan of Axler's approach, because to me it really gets to the (abstract) essence of things. When I truly started to "get" this approach, it really made linear algebra an important part of how I think.

Lorenzo Sadun's Linear Algebra: The Decoupling Principle would probably be enough too if you added something about determinants.

if self teaching you need a book that holds your hand and doesnt try to put you through the usual trials of "lets see if you can figure this out yourself.. oh you cant? maybe repeat the subject next term", or major proofs left as exercises for the reader. get a friendly hand-holdy book. im reading linear algebra, theory, intuition, code by mike cohen atm (up to ch4) and so far between that and a chatbot for clarification/links, im re-learning the L.A. i should have learn't at uni but for whatever reason just did not understand back then. those courses move fast and if you get stuck somewhere its game over. i think L.A. is way harder than calculus as a beginner, but once things start to click and fall into place it starts to feel easier.

> lets see if you can figure this out yourself..

If you are SELF-teaching, you need to learn how to figure things out.

When you can’t, there’s plenty of sources. It’s not the 1990s. Your favorite LLM probably gives good explanations of linear algebra ideas even on fast mode. Gemini was surprisingly good for me.

taking it upon yourself to self teach is figuring things out for yourself, no need to make it harder than it needs to be.

I strong second Strang. His book is the best first introduction to linear algebra, with "Done Right" marketing itself as a second course. Axler is notoriously shy with matrices, but Axler introduces them up front and uses them for the rest of the book.

If you liked 3B1B and prefer intuition/applications-heavy view, then definitely Strang over Axler. Check out especially his newer textbook "Linear Algebra and Learning from Data".

Axler is more of a pure math textbook - if you want to dive more into proofs and abstractions.

I would also say Axler is much better prep for higher level applied math, as well as pure. If you are interested in how the big ideas of linear algebra extend to things like Fourier analysis it's very helpful to see the more abstract explanation of vector spaces.

Not everybody is ready for that. Certainly not as a first course.

+1 for Strang.

You might enjoy my book https://pimbook.org/, which includes chapters on linear algebra.

Sorry to bother but is there hope we are going to see Practical Math for Programmers published any time soon?

For a second pass to linear algebra, “Linear Algebra via Exterior Products” from Winitzki is great

Linear Algebra by Jim Hefferon can be read online for free.

I enjoyed "No bullshit guide to linear algebra". And I wish "Coding The Matrix: Linear Algebra Through Computer Science Applications" still had the autograder working. Though I wonder if I could throw some agents at replacing it....

+1 for Boyd

Reply on news.ycombinator.com