Negative Positive
Title: Approachable, but Lost my Trust
Review: As a math hobbyist, I've been very eager to learn more about the Riemann Hypothesis. I ordered this book a couple weks ago, and fell ill this week -- so I had some time to spend reading.I didn't get very far before I found a rather glaring error. On page eighteen, the author explains one method for showing that there's no largest prime number. He asserts that:(2 * 3 * 5 * 7 * 11 * 13 * 17 + 1) / 7is equal to2 * 3 * 5 * 7 * 11 * 13 * 17 + (1/7)which is not correct. The left-hand term actually evaluates to2 * 3 * 5 * 11 * 13 * 17 + (1/7).Maybe I'll revise my review after I read more; perhaps the book really does deserve my trust. But after an early blunder like this in a simple topic, maybe I won't read any further.Less astute readers might not have caught this and later become confused. Maybe, in the deeper topics, I won't be able to proof the text and become confused or disillusioned by other errors.
Is the review positive or negative? 