<p>I have his early transcendental calc book (5th edition?) from half/ebay and am self studying it. Everything before the 2nd chapter is not there though. If anyone has this book, can you tell me what the bolded exercise numbers mean? I only want to do the "hard" exercises and hopefully that's what the bold signifies.</p>
<p>transcendental?</p>
<p>I thought all the numbers are bolded... The harder questions are located at the back of each section's problem set, and if you want to try the really hard ones, see the Problem Plus sets after each chapter.</p>
<p>you picked a really bad book...lol. I did james stewart for cal III and the way the book is set up is so confusing just to read...iono maybe its just me. Larson is the way to go IMHO. anyway totally unrelated but if u need the answers to chapter 1-11 on the stewart book go here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.in4matica.nl/%5B/url%5D">http://www.in4matica.nl/</a></p>
<p>well i just pick out the theorems and skim the proofs and then work on a few problems. the book is not very organized but the examples are easy to follow.</p>
<p>james stewert is a crappy book...very hard if you are self studying or you have a teacher who you cant understand.</p>
<p>its not a crappy book. its just crappy for AP. its basically intro to real analysis cuz it proves every single theorum it uses. in AP calc, you dont need to understand how to derive formulas for limits.
i know people who self studied BC from it and got 5 on teh exam. so it shouldnt be that bad of a book.</p>
<p>^</p>
<p>HAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA</p>
<p>what does that make spivak and apostol then?</p>
<p>I wouldn't call Stewart's book a (very) rigorous one, <em>certainly</em> not on the level of Apostol. However, if one follows it very closely, it is a very good book, and it is certainly usable for self-study.</p>
<p>I was just about to say that, lostincode. Spivak is an awesome book, and is rigorous; that is the Calculus that all should learn. I self-studied from Stewart, which is rather easy in comparison. (However, a Real Analysis book, like Houshang Sohrab's or Weiss and McDonalds, is almost entirely proof, with little application).</p>