Lewis has probably graduated, so this is more for others: it is more effective to understand physics by spending more time studying the material in each chapter than doing a bunch of problems. Doing problems gives a false sense of understanding, and often hurts the learning process by making different questions seem disjointed when they're really connected.
I disagree. More often I find the opposite to be true: I’ll read an example/solution and think that I’ve understood it, then completely blank when it comes to actually applying the concepts in a problem. To each their own, but I’ve learned the hard way to not trust that illusion of understanding that comes with only “studying.” To me, studying is problem solving but I’ll concede everyone’s got it differently
@@jasonwu9585 It is useful to go beyond reading and to write, making the learning process more active. I think it makes sense to do this in three stages: 1. Take notes on the material. 2. Work through the example problems. 3. Do a few 'confirmation' problems. But only a few problems. When the learner puts too much emphasis on the problems, they tend to think they have a comprehensive understanding, especially when rushing through to get them done. But with this approach, the learner really has done a small subset of the possible problems, and has treated them as disconnected from other problems. Both limits the effectiveness of the approach.
"Methods of Theoretical Physics. Parts 1 & 2" 1953 ~ Morse & Feshbach is the Heavy Artillery of Mathematical Physics! Well-written and covers a mountain of information in a well-organized manner. I used this as a reference rather than a textbook; if you need something beyond the scope of the usual topics covered in a Math Methods course, go here.
There have been some changes in terminology since then + Clifford Algebra / Geometric calculus. Also, computing tools make use of matrices much easier and more commonly used. I have a set I bout around 1975 use it occasionally.
"Electromagnetic Fields and Waves" by Lorrain & Corson (2nd Edition) contains two problems relating Electrodynamics and Cosmology. Problem 4-22 starts with: "In 1959 Lyttelton and Bondi [Proc. Roy. Soc. (London) A, vol. 232, p.313] suggested that the expansion of the Universe could be explained on the basis of Newtonian Mechanics if matter contained a [tiny] net electric charge." A follow-on problem, Problem 10-11, mentions that correction terms to curlB and divE due to the creation of this charge should be on the order of R^-2 where R is on the order of the radius of the Universe, so that the new terms would be negligible at all length scales but cosmological situations. This hypothesis is consistent with the linear velocity-distance observations. Rather thought-provoking questions from an Undergraduate E&M textbook!
The oldest textbook that I have as the original owner is "Thermodynamics, Kinetic Theory and Statistical Thermodynamics" (2nd edition) by Sears & Salinger from Fall 1982. (We've both held up pretty well!)
came from r/youtubers, blown away by the quality of this video! there's literally nothing I can add or suggest, if you keep uploading this content you'll grow in no time
Hello dear, I'm not a physics student but i had completed engineering in electronics. I had discovered my imagination skills in astrophysics and quantum mechanics before 5 to 6 years, I'm learning many concepts from past few years by myself and finally on the point where I want to right a hypothesis/theoretical paper. I knw the concepts but when I start reading the research paper i found that my mathematical concepts are really weak. And before some days I found the book for mathematical methods but till the date I didn't buy it. Now I knew the astrophysics students also reading it means I can also start from it. Thank you!
Robert Resnick taught at my university. One of my room mates had him for physics recitation. My 3rd edition from 1977 is sitting on the shelf as I look at it.
What astrophysics books in Spanish do you recommend? As far as possible, they are deep and give me a great glimpse of what astrophysics is. Although I have not even finished my secondary studies, I was lucky enough to read aliens by Avi loeb and I would like to know, learn and discover more about the subject.
@@FernandoGarcia-iz3ni Assuming you're still looking for those books, I suggest you take a look at different physics curricula in high schools / colleges in your country and see what they use. Should give you a pretty good starting point.
Why is it nobody recommends mathematical methods in physics by Mary L boas... I believe it is the best mathematical physics book out there..Its perfect for undergrad...Thanks for the other recommendations though.
Is it possible to study undergraduate Physics alone without going to any university? Don't professors give exam papers and homework questions from questions found already in textbooks? Are lectures the same as reading textbooks?
Lectures & textbooks should be complementary. A textbook contains the author's rigid, start-to-finish presentation of a subject; a lecture should contain the speaker's understanding of the text *and* elaboration of subtle parts of the text. A Q&A session should be part of a lecture as well.
I can recommend Sears and Zemansky's "University Physics with Modern Physics", (Pearson Publishing): a brilliant textbook to learn from. Explanations and examples are truly comprehensive, and the authors are not out to flex their own egos at the expense of the reader. It's a huge book, very thorough. Get this, and you won't need any lecture material.
@varunv2584 Yes, I think you'll be o.k. The 'bridging problems' and 'challenge problems' can be quite tough, but if you tackle them later on, perhaps, having gained confidence from the exercises, you'll be fine there too. I wouldn't set too much store by any I.Q. findings you may have gained, however: I, myself, took a different set of tests to the Mensa ones and came out with an average level of 153 on the Stanford/Binet scale. Motivation, interest, patience, humility, and emotional intelligence are all vital assets, too. By the way, I'd stay clear of the Riley, Hobson and Bence math book: it's very badly written.
The Riley, Hobson and Bence book can only be recommended to masochists. It's chock full of "It is obvious that......." statements and cryptic asides. Useless as a textbook for learning from, and nauseatingly condescending as a reference book. Its attitude and content stinks. The Feynman books, however, I can heartily recommend. Tough but tasty.
Yes, the first few chapters will cover the very basic concepts of thermodynamics. As you move through the book, you'll be introduced to the more complex ideas
If you're just starting out then I'd recommend nailing the basics of all of physics first with a book like Principles of Physics. In terms of astrophysics, if it's just a general interest thing that you're looking for then some of the popular science books are actually really good. Stuff like Cosmos by Carl Sagan, A brief history of time by Prof. Stephen Hawking etc.
It depends where you're currently at. If you have (calculus-based) high-school physics and math under your belt, then I would recommend either (or both) Halliday and Resnick, or Sears and Zemansky to get a feel for all the subject areas. A lot of the math you'll need is baked into the text and examples, and Sears and Zemansky, in particular, has bags of exercises and problems to get you limbered up. I would advise you, also, to avoid any British textbooks in general: English authors seem to me to be more into keeping the subject to themselves and paying scant regard to the needs of beginning (or even fairly advanced) students. American authors are way better at fixing principles firmly in your head! By now, though, you're probably well on the way, and my reply is too late.......
Hi, really helpful video! I have a question: i am a high school student at my 4th of 5 years (in italy) and i want to study Physics at Uni, but all the physics theachers i had in the past 3 years and the one i have this year were pretty useless and we as a class are really arretrate in physics. i want to know if i need to study again from scratch the whole physics high school program in order to survive in uni (and if this is the case, what textbooks would you suggest) or if i can just have good maths and start physics at uni from a low level. thanks!
You’re definitely gonna want to get a pretty good understanding of the basics of physics such as kinematics, equations of motion, energy and angular momentum conservation laws etc. But usually the first year of uni helps teach the basics of all the physics you’ll need for the rest of the degree. If I could recommend one textbook to get a pretty general understanding of physics, it would be principles of physics which I talk about in the video. Hope that helps and let me know if you have any more questions :)
Absolutely! Principles of physics is a great textbook to help transition to university physics from high school. It's probably the one I'd recommend most for that
Lewis has probably graduated, so this is more for others: it is more effective to understand physics by spending more time studying the material in each chapter than doing a bunch of problems. Doing problems gives a false sense of understanding, and often hurts the learning process by making different questions seem disjointed when they're really connected.
I disagree. More often I find the opposite to be true: I’ll read an example/solution and think that I’ve understood it, then completely blank when it comes to actually applying the concepts in a problem. To each their own, but I’ve learned the hard way to not trust that illusion of understanding that comes with only “studying.” To me, studying is problem solving but I’ll concede everyone’s got it differently
@@jasonwu9585 It is useful to go beyond reading and to write, making the learning process more active. I think it makes sense to do this in three stages:
1. Take notes on the material.
2. Work through the example problems.
3. Do a few 'confirmation' problems.
But only a few problems. When the learner puts too much emphasis on the problems, they tend to think they have a comprehensive understanding, especially when rushing through to get them done. But with this approach, the learner really has done a small subset of the possible problems, and has treated them as disconnected from other problems. Both limits the effectiveness of the approach.
"Methods of Theoretical Physics. Parts 1 & 2" 1953 ~ Morse & Feshbach
is the Heavy Artillery of Mathematical Physics!
Well-written and covers a mountain of information in a well-organized manner.
I used this as a reference rather than a textbook; if you need something beyond the scope of the usual topics covered in a Math Methods course, go here.
cheers mate
There have been some changes in terminology since then + Clifford Algebra / Geometric calculus. Also, computing tools make use of matrices much easier and more commonly used. I have a set I bout around 1975 use it occasionally.
@@charlesspringer4709 Nice!
Every Feynman lectures to inspire a general view of the world
I haven't read the other Feynman lectures but after reading the QM one they're now on my reading list
@@LewisMCooper Plan for some interesting insights, even after all these years.
Thank you brother! Just starting my college life and these will surely pave my way !! ❤
"Electromagnetic Fields and Waves" by Lorrain & Corson (2nd Edition) contains two problems relating Electrodynamics and Cosmology. Problem 4-22 starts with: "In 1959 Lyttelton and Bondi [Proc. Roy. Soc. (London) A, vol. 232, p.313] suggested that the expansion of the Universe could be explained on the basis of Newtonian Mechanics if matter contained a [tiny] net electric charge."
A follow-on problem, Problem 10-11, mentions that correction terms to curlB and divE due to the creation of this charge should be on the order of R^-2 where R is on the order of the radius of the Universe, so that the new terms would be negligible at all length scales but cosmological situations. This hypothesis is consistent with the linear velocity-distance observations.
Rather thought-provoking questions from an Undergraduate E&M textbook!
The oldest textbook that I have as the original owner is "Thermodynamics, Kinetic Theory and Statistical Thermodynamics" (2nd edition) by Sears & Salinger from Fall 1982.
(We've both held up pretty well!)
Thank you for these nice suggestiong!
came from r/youtubers, blown away by the quality of this video!
there's literally nothing I can add or suggest, if you keep uploading this content you'll grow in no time
Thank you so much! I really appreciate the support!!
Thanks for the book reccomendations!
I had the 1966 edition for my 1967 freshman year at University of Massachusetts Boston. It was in a converted office building at the time.
Feynman lectures on physics 🙌🙌
You're spot on with this choice. A wonderful series of books. Some of the greatest reading hours I've spent on this planet! 👍
Thank you this video was truly helpful
Glad it was helpful!
Hello dear,
I'm not a physics student but i had completed engineering in electronics.
I had discovered my imagination skills in astrophysics and quantum mechanics before 5 to 6 years, I'm learning many concepts from past few years by myself and finally on the point where I want to right a hypothesis/theoretical paper. I knw the concepts but when I start reading the research paper i found that my mathematical concepts are really weak. And before some days I found the book for mathematical methods but till the date I didn't buy it. Now I knew the astrophysics students also reading it means I can also start from it. Thank you!
I used the steam-powered edition of Halliday & Resnick as an Undergrad.
Robert Resnick taught at my university. One of my room mates had him for physics recitation. My 3rd edition from 1977 is sitting on the shelf as I look at it.
@@KevinBalch-dt8ot Very cool! I used the same edition in 1981. Sadly, I had to let it go when I needed to downsize my library.
Thank you for the video.
You’re welcome :)
Thank you so much!😃👍
No problem! Glad you find it useful
MORE TEXTBOOK SUGGESTIONS VIDEO PLEASE 🙏🙏🙏
In my youth, Holiday and Resnick was a two volume hardback or one really thcnk book.
First and maybe the second editions were called “The Great Eggplant” for their girth and purple cover.
Awesome ,informative
Glad it was helpful!
Mathematical Methods by K. Riley also has a solution manual.
Great tip!
Thanks bro, it helps a lot.
What astrophysics books in Spanish do you recommend? As far as possible, they are deep and give me a great glimpse of what astrophysics is. Although I have not even finished my secondary studies, I was lucky enough to read aliens by Avi loeb and I would like to know, learn and discover more about the subject.
I can't really give many suggestions for text books in other languages sorry since the only textbooks I've read were in English
You mean books translated into Spanish from other languages?
@@user-wm2tw Yes, My mother tongue is spanish
@@FernandoGarcia-iz3ni so bro you can read converted pdf's
@@FernandoGarcia-iz3ni Assuming you're still looking for those books, I suggest you take a look at different physics curricula in high schools / colleges in your country and see what they use. Should give you a pretty good starting point.
Why is it nobody recommends mathematical methods in physics by Mary L boas... I believe it is the best mathematical physics book out there..Its perfect for undergrad...Thanks for the other recommendations though.
I used the 2nd Edition in my day.
What about high school physics? Any book recommendations? Please
@@omirospavlou7607 no bullshit guide to maths and physics.
I would also recommend resnick halliday and krane volume 1 and 2
Is it possible to study undergraduate Physics alone without going to any university?
Don't professors give exam papers and homework questions from questions found already in textbooks?
Are lectures the same as reading textbooks?
Lectures & textbooks should be complementary. A textbook contains the author's rigid, start-to-finish presentation of a subject; a lecture should contain the speaker's understanding of the text *and* elaboration of subtle parts of the text. A Q&A session should be part of a lecture as well.
I can recommend Sears and Zemansky's "University Physics with Modern Physics", (Pearson Publishing): a brilliant textbook to learn from. Explanations and examples are truly comprehensive, and the authors are not out to flex their own egos at the expense of the reader. It's a huge book, very thorough. Get this, and you won't need any lecture material.
@@terencemeikle534 I have this book already.
My Mensa IQ results are 130. Will I be able to solve the questions found in it?
@varunv2584 Yes, I think you'll be o.k. The 'bridging problems' and 'challenge problems' can be quite tough, but if you tackle them later on, perhaps, having gained confidence from the exercises, you'll be fine there too. I wouldn't set too much store by any I.Q. findings you may have gained, however: I, myself, took a different set of tests to the Mensa ones and came out with an average level of 153 on the Stanford/Binet scale. Motivation, interest, patience, humility, and emotional intelligence are all vital assets, too. By the way, I'd stay clear of the Riley, Hobson and Bence math book: it's very badly written.
@@terencemeikle534 thank you for your comprehensive reply!
The Riley, Hobson and Bence book can only be recommended to masochists. It's chock full of "It is obvious that......." statements and cryptic asides. Useless as a textbook for learning from, and nauseatingly condescending as a reference book. Its attitude and content stinks. The Feynman books, however, I can heartily recommend. Tough but tasty.
My thermodynamics was weak in class 11 ;( does that book have basics?
Yes, the first few chapters will cover the very basic concepts of thermodynamics. As you move through the book, you'll be introduced to the more complex ideas
@@LewisMCooper thank you so much! For your help
I wanna ask you about whether these books are suitable for high school students
Thank u so much but can u give some advice which book should i follow for astrophysics from starting
If you're just starting out then I'd recommend nailing the basics of all of physics first with a book like Principles of Physics. In terms of astrophysics, if it's just a general interest thing that you're looking for then some of the popular science books are actually really good. Stuff like Cosmos by Carl Sagan, A brief history of time by Prof. Stephen Hawking etc.
Thanks
Hello there . What do you recommend for a beginner .
It depends where you're currently at. If you have (calculus-based) high-school physics and math under your belt, then I would recommend either (or both) Halliday and Resnick, or Sears and Zemansky to get a feel for all the subject areas. A lot of the math you'll need is baked into the text and examples, and Sears and Zemansky, in particular, has bags of exercises and problems to get you limbered up. I would advise you, also, to avoid any British textbooks in general: English authors seem to me to be more into keeping the subject to themselves and paying scant regard to the needs of beginning (or even fairly advanced) students. American authors are way better at fixing principles firmly in your head! By now, though, you're probably well on the way, and my reply is too late.......
thank you
I think you should raise your sound and lower the music
Hey,buddy Can I do self study ❓❓❓
The combination of a text like H&R and a Schaum's Outline on Physics (There are several variants.) would be a good starting point.
Self studying requires intelligence
Hi, really helpful video! I have a question: i am a high school student at my 4th of 5 years (in italy) and i want to study Physics at Uni, but all the physics theachers i had in the past 3 years and the one i have this year were pretty useless and we as a class are really arretrate in physics. i want to know if i need to study again from scratch the whole physics high school program in order to survive in uni (and if this is the case, what textbooks would you suggest) or if i can just have good maths and start physics at uni from a low level. thanks!
You’re definitely gonna want to get a pretty good understanding of the basics of physics such as kinematics, equations of motion, energy and angular momentum conservation laws etc. But usually the first year of uni helps teach the basics of all the physics you’ll need for the rest of the degree. If I could recommend one textbook to get a pretty general understanding of physics, it would be principles of physics which I talk about in the video. Hope that helps and let me know if you have any more questions :)
@@LewisMCooper thanks a lot! i will get the book then
Did you pursuing both physics and astrophysics major same time
I’m pursuing an astrophysics degree but a lot of the first few years cover a lot of the same physics as a physics degree
0:56
Hey can I use one as a
high school student
😂😮
Absolutely! Principles of physics is a great textbook to help transition to university physics from high school. It's probably the one I'd recommend most for that
Sir I want study astrophysics what mark is eligible to entry good university reply
2023 and posted 2 years ago??? oh for making it viral? we will allow it openheartedly