seriously, how is it so fucking good? perhaps some higher-level texts like Bourbaki are better for graduates/PhD students (i wouldn't know, just a ugrad myself), but on the undergraduate level nothing beats this, it's got everything and more and presented so elegantly

Does this book include Universal algebra or does it follow the classic approach where you prove stuff the same stuff like the Isomophism theorems three fucking times for Groups, Rings and Vector Spaces separately?

vol.2 has a chapter on universal algebra, but the isomorphism theorems are proved in vol.1 (iirc proved only for groups, for the rest the reader is encouraged to fill in the gaps)

philosophies differ, but many people don’t mind doing the separate theories first, since it’s pretty quick anyway and jumping straight to congruence relations can feel like a weird and unmotivated abstraction

Post TOC nagger

next time, ask nicely, nagger

>next time, ask nicely, nagger

sowwy :3 UwU

whats with these fuckers calling everything basic

basic algebra should be the basic theory of:

groups, rings, modules and fields

and not a bunch of random shit

Worse are books which just call it Algebra.

How does it compare to Dummit & Foote.

>t. never studied Algebra

>>t. never studied Algebra

then wtf do you care?

they're comparable, but i'd say it's slightly more advanced and terse than DF

Because I want to, and I want to know which one to start with, if I like Rudin's writing style.

Jacobson or DF are not the best reading for a complete beginner unless you're "mature", i would recommend Herstein's Topics first (and Jacobson afterwards, if you want more)

Okay thanks.

how hard can basic algebra be? that's literally middle school math

Jokes aside, school algebra can be very difficult as well. Those olympiad equations books keep filtering me.

Rotman and Knapp are better

Based. Jacobson has far and away the best exposition of a mathematical writer.