Carl Friedrich Gauss [Library Binding]

The good thing about this book is the collection of illustrations. I assume from the biographies cited in the footnotes that the author has read them and that the biographical and non-scientific information is basically correct. The mathematics in the book, however, is not only wrong, but egregiously so.
Mathematics is not a popular subject. Its emphasis on precision makes it impossible to present fully accurately in a popularisation; some simplification must occur. And some fudge words ("such and such a theorem more-or-less states", "in most cases", etc.). Those of us who are mathematicians know and expect that, and, though we may cringe sometimes when reading a lay description of a piece of mathematics, we accept this as a fact of life. That said, I am appalled at Krista West's book. She doesn't merely oversimplify, but actually makes absurd claims, most glaringly on page 73, where, in discussing geodetic surveying, she states that from the length of one side of a triangle all the angles and the area can be determined. ROFL.
The sad thing is that, had any mathematician--or undergraduate mathematics major--read over the book before publication, many of the errors would have been caught. I have never looked up the algorithm for finding the date of Easter, but I don't need to know it to recognise that something is wrong in her description on page 18. The second and third steps are:
divide the year by 7 and call the remainder b
divide the year by 7 and call the remainder c.
If one of those 7's is not a typo, whoever made up the algorithm has some explaining to do! I should say that I verified my doubts by following the steps to calculate the date of Easter for this year and got an incorrect date. However, this could not be done: Each of the next two steps in the algorithm introduces new unexplained variables for which values could not be determined! If the algorithm is to be included in the book, it might as well be stated in full and correctly. If it is that simple, the child reading the book could then amuse himself or herself by calculating the date of Easter for this or next year; if it is too complicated, the child could at least see for himself or herself that it is complicated. No purpose is served, however, by giving an incorrect or incomplete algorithm.
I do know the Law of Quadratic Reciprocity and can testify that what is offered as its statement on page 53 is not it. Indeed, that what is stated makes no sense at all can be recognised without knowledge of the law in question.
I could continue in this vein, but I think the general picture has been well-enough painted that there is no need to continue. Except--it should be pointed out that a glossary in which key terms are "explained" by incorrect and nonsensical definitions is not helpful in the least.

This small book (and by inference, the other titles in the series) is a stiking example of extraordinary poor scholarship. It portends to be a biographical history of one of the most prolific thinkers in science and mathematics of all time: Carl Friedrich Gauss. It is extraordinarily flawed. As a teacher of mathematics, I would reject this as a term paper for a junior high school class.

It has serious errors in at least 3 categories:
1) Sins of Commission
2) Sins of Ommission
3) Errors in judgment on content, style, extent, and particularly, of usage of the English language.

1) Errors of Commission:
This text has clearly been written by a person with limited or no knowledge of mathematics and demonstrably no knowledge of Gauss's enormous contributions. From it's dedication "To my math-minded husband...," through nearly every explanation or example throughout the book, the ignorance of science and mathematics is demonstrated. Here are a couple of the key errors which only highly the major lack of understanding of the subject on which the author writes:
a) The author (p.30) explains the hugely significant contribution of the "Method of Least Squares" in modern statistics using a table of nearly equal values of the measurement of the length of a line, which explains a simple average, but NOT the least squares principle. The (correct) statement of "use it to find the best-fit line for a curve" is essentially an afterthought.

b) The discription of Gauss's "Fundamental Theorem of Algebra" (p. 45) is erroneous: Stating that all polynomials have the number of solutions equal to the largest exponent. Check this on the equation x-squared plus 1 = 0. There are NO solutions in the real number plane. Only when complex numbers are admitted is the statement true. Further, the author's statement that the Theorem is misnamed is preposterous: Solving simultaneous equations IS Algebra.

2) Errors of Omission:
a) Although the author writes of Gauss's productive relationship with Weber and their extensive contribution to the science and understanding of magnetism, the author appears totally unaware that "Gauss's Law of the Magnetic" is of little practical use, while its counterpart "Gauss's Law of Electric Field" is not only of theoretical value, but provides important computational results as well. Gauss's Law of Electricity does not even appear to be mentioned in the book.
b) In the extreme, the ommission of a thorough description of the Gaussian Distribution in all its ramifications as arguably the most important contribution to statistical inference (and therefore, to scientific inductive reasoning from physical data) is nothing less than a third strike with two outs in the last half of the ninth. The only mention in the entire book is in the 'Mathematical Terms with "Gauss" in their names' list on the bottom of the last page of text.
c) Most of the other key mathematical contributions that Gauss made appear only as a word in that list - 'Mathematical Terms with "Gauss" in their names' list.

3) Writing style and use of language: "See Jane run. See Dick run. See Dick and Jane run. See Dick run fast." Come on ! The vocabulary and use of the English language in this text is an insult to anyone with an education beyond first grade, and certainly anyone who would have the interest and intellect to read this book.

Seriously, the whole text is demeaning to the intelligence of its reader, the choices of subject matter were clearly based on a pittance of knowledge of the subject, and the errors of commission and omission are extant throughout. The book was obviously created in a very short time, with little subject matter knowledge, little scholarship, and edited much the same, the credentials of the Editorial Consultant not withstanding. What seems clear is that this book and the series project had principally fiscal motivation and little educational thought.

Regarding the other books in the series: An old proverb: "When the clock strikes 13, you not only know the 13th strike is wrong, you seriously question the other 12."

› Go to Amazon.com to see both reviews  1.0 out of 5 stars