41–50 of 180 posts
It is called "Who is Fourier: A Mathematical Adventure".
I was tremendously surprised by this unusual gem of a book. It covers the range from basic arithmetic to logarithms, trigonometry, calculus to fourier series.
https://www.amazon.com/Who-Fourier-Mathematical-Adventure-2n...
When I was studying physics, I found Feynman’s books in the library, read them all, and had the feeling I understand everything! But then I tried to solve some final exams from previous years, and realized the feeling is false. These books gave me great intuition - but they made all the math look deceivingly simple, and as a result it is hard to develop the actual problem solving skills and intuition. I know my exper…
Yeah, he was like that in person as well. When I was an undergraduate, he would "teach" a seminar on Tuesday afternoons called "PhysX" where you could go and ask any question you wanted. He'd go up to the blackboard and extemporaneously write things down and explain things in such a way that thought you really understood. But when you got back to your room and tried to replicate the chain of reasoning, there were alw…
The closest I'm aware of is What Is Mathematics? by Courant, Robbins, and Stewart -- starts off developing the natural numbers, goes onto number theory, analysis, complex numbers, set theory, projective geometry, non-euclidean geometry, topology, calculus, optimization, and some chapters on recent developments (as of its republishing in 1996, book was originally published in 1941). A lesser known one that isn't quite…
"Calculus Made Easy" by Silvanus P. Thompson (1910). It is availably freely online via the Gutenberg project and many other forms too. Chapter 1 is probably the best mathematics chapter I have ever read [0]. In two paragraphs, it beats most other calculus books. [0] http://calculusmadeeasy.org/1.html
Penrose's 'Road to Reality' [1] is a kind primer on where the math comes from, as it applies to physics. Kind of a philosophical walkthrough of how math applies to physics. It is nowhere near as concise as Feynman's lectures, but it does complement them pretty well, while getting more into the math, and why the math is needed to describe various aspects of physical reality. [1] https://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wor…
In terms of depth and breadth, the Princeton companions get close to Feynman.[1][2] A more formal approach appears in handbooks.[3][4] [1] Gowers et al., The Princeton Companion to Mathematics. https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691118802/th... [2] Higham and Dennis, The Princeton Companion to Applied Mathematics. https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691150390/th... [3] Zwillinger, CRC Standar…
But is really breadth and depth what makes Feynman’s approach to physics unique? To me the unique aspect is more the uncompromising intuitionistic approach with little consideration/adaptation for “shallow/correlative thinkers”...