Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I'm taking "real analysis" this year and the lecturer's major is PDE.

What he does is literally reading texts except proofs. This drives me crazy, so I asked the professor why he is not giving any proofs, and then he told me, "I'm not interested in proofs. I just understand big stories. If you are interested in the foundation of mathematics, go find a such professor".

I absolutely don't agree with him and don't understand him. I even got offended. Is it usual that a professor never proves a theorem in a class?

Moreover, he's giving definitions nobody uses. For example, he defines a limit point $p$ of $A$ as a point where every neighborhood $N$ of $p$ and $A$ are not disjoint. This is not the usual definition of a limit point.

I'm hesitating to drop the course and study it by myself. Have you ever experienced a similar case before? What was your choice?

share|improve this question
What do you study? What academic undergraduate is that class for? –  DonAntonio Mar 8 at 15:59
I agree with fish: if possible drop the course and also complain to the head master. –  DonAntonio Mar 8 at 16:08
You meet such people every once in a while. I agree, that doing proofs is essential, still, don't be so harsh, my experience is that such people usually have great intuitions and it is a big opportunity to learn, to gain a deeper understanding (even at the cost of proofs, which I recommend you to do by yourself). However, I must admit, this only applies to mathematicians of world class (i.e. if it made him/her a world-class mathematician, then it's worth listening to, whatever it is); if someone is skipping proofs because he lacks the knowledge or understanding, get away as fast as you can. –  dtldarek Mar 8 at 16:52
The definition of limit point you gave is the one I'm familiar with. It's also the definition given on Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limit_point. What is the "usual" definition? –  Cocopuffs Mar 9 at 1:25
@John.p Assuming that by neighborhood, your lecturer means neighborhood excluding $p$, then I don't see the difference. Of course, if your lecturer means neighborhood containing $p$, then every point will always be a limit point. I guess the issue was with the definition of neighborhood and not of limit point. –  Cocopuffs Mar 9 at 4:03

3 Answers 3

up vote 13 down vote accepted

This is not usual. Most undergraduate classes, especially real analysis, are proof-based.

share|improve this answer
What should i do? Is there any facility i can complain this? –  John. p Mar 8 at 16:01
@John. p You should be able to complain to the relevant faculty of wherever you are taking the class at. –  Andrew D Mar 8 at 16:02
If there's nothing that the faculty wants to do/can do, you have to make a decision about whether or not to stay in the class. If the credits aren't necessary/useful for you, I would advise studying it on your own if you can. –  WChang Mar 8 at 16:04

I totally agree with what other participants say: QUIT this course. It is a serious matter: your future. Then nobody has the right of joking or playing with it as an incompetent lecturer can do.

share|improve this answer

Real analysis classes are all about proofs. The definition of limit point given is also not the usual one. I highly doubt the competency of your lecturer. Complain immediately to the head of department.

share|improve this answer
I'm not sure the definition of limit point is wrong, but it is unusually phrased. I suppose the distinction is whether by neighborhood he means punctured neighborhood. But the presentation is awkward, for sure. –  Arkamis Mar 8 at 16:09

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.