Books I couldn't finish...

Every now and then I come across a book that I can't make it through.  I typically try to get about 100 pages in before I finally give up.  Sometimes the books are too boring, about something different than I thought, or I don't like the author's voice.  Other times the subject matter is just too difficult or too far outside my area and I don't get anything out of it.  This last is the case for David Foster Wallace's Everything and More. 
I promise not to get too deep into discussing DFW as a writer here.  But a little background on him helps to put this odd book into context.  So most will likely know Wallace for either his fiction or his journalistic essays.  His most famous work of fiction, Infinite Jest, is a monster and one of my favorite novels.  I won't write about that here.  His essays were published both in a variety of magazines and in expanded versions in collections.  These range all sorts of topics and can be pretty funny.  DFW gets really invested in his subject matter and tends to have unique and perceptive perspectives. 
In addition, DFW also has a background in philosophy that helps him to write with great exactitude.
Everything and More is a departure from the majority of the rest of his work.  This book is on the mathematical concept of infinity.  He writes the book in his signature avuncular stye and includes loads of asides and digressive information as he goes.  But this book about infinity includes a lot of discussions about calculus and differential equations and a historical dive into mathematics in the 18th century.  A lot of this is interesting and deceptively easy to read.  The problem is that the math is actually pretty difficult.  Wallace claims that memories of college math should be enough to get through the book.  While I made it through some college math, I never got to calculus and even the notations for a lot of his material is unfamiliar.  This makes for some rough going for someone not really in tune with mathematics.  This isn't a fault of the book.
One of the more striking descriptions in the book is Wallace's attempt to parse the difference between zero and nothing.  I like this because it is illustrative of the promise of the book and a direction I would have liked to see it take more.  It also helps to explain both the depth that the book takes and Wallace's ability to break down potentially difficult topics. 
In this example, he describes two students who both fail (get a zero) on a history test, only one student is not enrolled in the class.  The enrolled student receives a zero and the non-enrolled student gets nothing.  Had the book contained more like this I likely would have made it further through.
I was initially interested in reading this book because of Wallace.  I was also interested in the concept of infinity, and particularly any intersections that it may have with sublimity, another concept that I find fascinating.  Although I did not expect Wallace to address these topics in conjunction in this book, I figured that I could make those connections on my own.
In the end, I am still interested in the concept and many of the specific ideas that Wallace presents.  I may return to this book eventually if I can up my math understanding a bit.