Fizzix

September 11, 2007 12:45 PM

I want to start teaching myself physics, but how?

I am a freshman in college and I am considering majoring in physics. Physics has always been something I've been intrigued by but I am admittedly not very good at it. I would like to be good at it, though.

I am not presently enrolled in a physics course but I am planning to enroll in one next semester. As for now, I'm looking for a good "self-teaching" physics book that focuses on introductory and classical physics (vectors, forces, tension, etc). I am aware that physics requires a lot of mathematics, and I don't have much confidence in my mathematical ability (I've only taken up to calculus AB so far). So, preferably, this book would also extensively cover the mathematical concepts in clear terms.

I have looked into some of Feynman's books but the one's I've found seem either too advanced for me (especially in terms of mathematics) or they aren't what I'm looking for. Some of the other books I've looked at introduce a slew of Greek letters and variables by the second or third page, which is far too steep for me.

I'd like to avoid the "Idiots" or "Dummies" guides.

Though I am looking for books, other suggestions are welcome (I'm watching the physics video lectures from MIT OCW).

I have looked through some of the past similar questions, but I am interested in going beyond just physics concepts - I want to master the mathematics behind those concepts. For example, in this post, the poster is more advanced than I am.

posted by god particle to education (12 comments total)

try Physics for Future Presidents
posted by imaswinger at 12:53 PM on September 11, 2007

Are you taking math right now? If not, do. Even if it means just sitting in on lectures and doing problems in your own time. Keep those skills up.

Go talk to the Director of Undergraduate Studies in the physics department (or if it's a small department, just talk to anyone who seems encouraging). Email and politely ask to make an appointment. He or she will be able to give you good advice about how to prepare for the specific way they teach intro physics (this varies from college to college, often). Which things do they focus on? What do they find undergrads with your math background have trouble with? etc. Which intro course would they recommend for a possible major? This will help you now, and establish a relationship that will help you if you keep going with physics in the future.
posted by LobsterMitten at 1:22 PM on September 11, 2007 [1 favorite]

Courant and Hilbert's two volume series of Methods of Mathematical Physics. Covers everything basic and less so topics that you will need in order to develop a solid mathematical background. A classic.
posted by carmina at 1:28 PM on September 11, 2007

At the moment, you're a freshman and you already plan to start taking physics courses next term. There is plenty of time to learn the physics, the key is going to be getting sufficiently comfortable with the tools and the formalism that your brain is free to learn the physics. The phrase that gets tossed around is "mathematical maturity," and while it seems a bit condescending at first, in retrospect it's a good one. It just means being able to see a slew of Greek letters in a big ugly equation and piece by piece work out what it means. Usually, you'll find that even the nastier looking equations are comprised of a number of simple things that you already understand.

Most of the time, an undergrad physics problem has two hard parts. First, you have to set up your equation correctly. This is the physics step. Second, you have to calculate some integral or solve some differential equation. Calculus AB is actually a really good start, and you don't need more than that to do the mechanics and basic E&M that one does in an intro physics course. It may be boring, but probably the most valuable thing to do early is to get comfortable with doing basic integrals. Integration by parts and u substitution especially.

But really, that's only if you want to. Going through something like Physics for Future Presidents will be a lot more interesting and will probably help motivate you to deal with the relatively boring material of intro physics classes in order to get to the fun stuff, even if it won't be as edifying in the same way as what I suggested. And that is likely way more imporant.
posted by Schismatic at 1:45 PM on September 11, 2007

physics for future presidents is a little too fluffy for someone considering majoring in the field... on the other hand courant/hilbert is the opposite; but a book on mathematical methods is not the place to start as a college freshman, (though it will definitely be a useful reference in third or fourth year).

i'm not sure which feynman books you've looked at, but the canonical ones are the three-volume lectures on physics. the copy i have doesn't have any equations for the first 20 or so pages and it starts out very slowly. also, first-year undergraduate physics texts are often very good, despite all their shortcomings - halliday / resnick is popular. i can't imagine what kind of intro physics book starts out with massive equations.. what have you been looking at?

you'll need a semester or two of calculus under your belt to really understand physics taught at the level a freshman physics major would learn. and with good reason - calculus was largely invented as a tool for describing physics. if you were able to get through the class without really "getting it", you'll have to actually learn it. differential equations are basically the language here, and understanding them and what they mean is essential. so if you see greek letters and its all mumbo-jumbo, i would start there.

finally, there's something physics students pick up which, as i spend time in a different field, i'm starting to recognize - physics texts are generally not meant to be read passively, like you would read a history book. you have to slow way the hell down, think about each equation and understand the reasoning behind how it was written, or the intermediate steps between it and the one before.

a lot of times these are skipped over, and being able to fill in the blanks is part of the mathematical maturity that schismatic is talking about. sometimes this involves stopping and working the results out yourself on the side. understanding when to pace your reading so that you really get it is a skill that can take a lot of time to learn, so don't lose heart if it seems impossibly complicated to start with.

(also a lot of physics books start out with some kind of "mathematical review" chapter where all the math you'll need for the book is gone over.. this can make it seem painful and dreary, and it might be worth it to skip this part and come back to it when you encounter some math you don't understand or recognize.)
posted by sergeant sandwich at 3:25 PM on September 11, 2007 [1 favorite]

Check out The Elegant Universe.

It's not necessarily hardcore physics, but the first few chapters are a great into to quantum and classical mechanics. It's a great read, and the super-string stuff is a bonus. It could provide a quick baseline for the direction that you want to move in.
posted by donguanella at 3:31 PM on September 11, 2007

I'd pass on the Courant and Hilbert and on the Feynman lectures -- they may be ok for a second go-round. I think seargeant sandwich is right about C&H, and a lot of the Feynman lecture stuff is better as a new way of looking at something you already know rather than as a useful introduction. I'd look for a used copy of Eric Rogers' Physics for the Inquiring Mind. But I also think that introductory physics is best with a talented guide -- shop around carefully for your first instructor, and then really dig in. And don't worry too much about the math -- that will come if you stick with it. Good luck!
posted by Killick at 3:47 PM on September 11, 2007

Just take the intro physics courses from the department.
You might consider picking up that textbook, it will be easier going than feynman.

What I'd recommend, is that you work on the mathematical maturity. Take a vector calculus course, a differential equations course, and a linear algebra course. (Not necessarily all at the same time.)
posted by sebastienbailard at 5:12 PM on September 11, 2007

This might help:
HOW to BECOME a GOOD THEORETICAL PHYSICIST. I haven't made any attempt to follow the recommendations there, but he's a Nobel Prize winner, how bad can it be?
posted by Gamecat at 5:47 PM on September 11, 2007

Instead of the Feynman lectures, see if you can get your hands on copies of Six Easy Pieces and Six Not-So-Easy pieces for conceptual physics that is light on the math. The more advanced material in Not-So-Easy will keep you interested when you're blue in the face from calculating the procession rate of a gyroscope.

Any physics professor worth his salt is going to go over the basics of derivatives and integrals the first time they're brought up, and in an intro-level course, you'll only ever really see the easiest calc. Diff eq. is definitely not necessary; you're much better off getting solid trig skills, as you'll be using them nonstop throughout the first semester. If you want to buff up on calc, get the Stewart Calculus. It is easily worth the $50 it'll take to get a used copy.

I've taken calc-based physics using the previously mentioned Halliday-Resnick book and also using Knight's Physics for Scientists and Engineers. They're close, but I'd recommend the Knight book.

The most important thing is what book your professor will use . Go find the professor that will be teaching it in the semester you will take it and find out what they use.
posted by tylermoody at 6:50 PM on September 11, 2007

Also, see if your school has a Mathematica license. I've gotten free copies of 5.2 and 6.0 through mine, and it's a great tool for double-checking your answers for complex math.
posted by tylermoody at 6:53 PM on September 11, 2007

Remember, the physics curriculum of any college is designed for the express purpose of teaching you physics. So I wouldn't worry right now about whether or not you have all the background, or if you're mathematically prepared. Usually the physics courses are designed to teach you the necessary math, especially at the higher levels. That's not to say you shouldn't take the standard calculus courses, but don't think you need to read all of Courant and Hilbert to take intro mechanics.

So use this semester to concentrate on the classes you're in now. As long as you know basic differentiation and integration, you'll be fine for first-year physics.
posted by kiltedtaco at 7:24 PM on September 11, 2007