<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Good text, terrible production
Review: As far as the text goes, this is a pretty nice book. But the publishers have done the author a disservice in how they produced the book (maybe over-produced is a better term). It looks to me as if the book was intended to be a coffee-table sized book, then, when that turned out to be too expensive, the size was reduced. So we get tiny print, small pictures, and an over-dense page layout. Plus, there's one of the most irritating typos I've ever seen: the splash page for chapter three says it is about the Pythagorean "theorum"!!The actual content is competently done, for the most part reflecting what is in the standard references and not taking any big interpretive risks. There is more coverage of recent mathematics than is common on books aimed at the "general reader." The bibliography is much too short, but it points to other books that do have more extensive references. There are better short histories of mathematics, but this one won't lead you astray... provided your eyes are good and small sans-serif type doesn't bother you!
Rating: 
Summary: Informative, but not terribly interesting
Review: I read this book because math is one of my favorite subjects and it seemed to be full of inforamtion. And it was full of information which stretched from discussing math in Pythagoras's times all the way up to modern chaos theory, but as I read it I just didn't find that it captured my attention as I had hoped. As I read through this novel I felt that only a small portion of what I was reading was really going to stay with me. I often felt my mind wandering as I just didn't find myself completely interested and sometimes I had to remind myself to pay attention. I would have liked a little bit more discussion on the importance and applications of the mathematics that was being developed. There wasn't as much depth as I yearned for, but perhaps this can be forgiven to some extent considering how much the author was attempting to discuss. Despite all of the aforementioned, I'm still giving this book 3 stars(although I'd prefer to give it 2.5 if I could). It was a very easy read and certainly didn't get particularly complicated. Plus, there were some pretty nice illustrations. Overall, I'd say that although I don't regret having read the book, I probably wouldn't read it again.
Rating:
Summary: It's OK. Just know what you're getting.
Review: I was under the impression when I ordered this that it was an ordinary book you could read straight through. It's actually more of a general reference book of math history, organized in subtopics with really tiny, dense print written with little flair.
Rating:
Summary: Good text, terrible production
Review: So much intellectual output, so much practical significance, so diverse a spectrum of imagination -- this book is tough to put down. The most provocative theme: there may be a world of mathematical genious lost forever to time, decay, and obscurity. So much of today's mathematics descends from manuscripts that were buried in dust for centuries, or thoughts that were expressed but not firmly grasped until much time had elapsed. Perhaps a more thorough investigation of ancient/medieval math is warranted. Who knows what new ideas might emerge?
Rating:
Summary: Good history, not enough mathematics
Review: The book has an excellent layout and has clear descriptions and focus. I liked the references to other cultures and how they influenced the early development of mathematics, which is a refreshing change to the usual Western European slant that is portrayed in most modern mathematics textbooks. This is a book for the lay person, and the author has gone to lengths to make sure there are no equations to look at. You may think this is a good thing, but consider that most of us learned mathematics from textbooks writing equations on paper. On several occasions, the author makes references to mathematical formula or theorem but does not illustrate their mathematical representation. As a person with a Master's degree in mathematics (admittedly its been about 6 years since I used it seriously :), I found myself scratching my head to remember some of the formulas the author mentions in the book and how they were applied.
<< 1 >>
| 
