Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: How to self-study physics?

news.ycombinator.com

71–80 of 194 posts

Re: Ask HN: How to self-study physics?

#71
If you have the freshman/junior Halliday-Resnick stuff down I'd suggest jumping right in. Susskind's Theoretical Minimum (https://theoreticalminimum.com) is excellent, he has a lot of videos online. I'm using the book version (https://www.amazon.com/Theoretical-Minimum-Start-Doing-Physi...) for self study.

Re: Ask HN: How to self-study physics?

#72

Hi hsikka, Are you a PhD student? And if so, are you aiming at a career in academic research? I'll offer my advice as a math professor, and as someone who supervises students. If you want to get a strong foundation in physics, then reading Halliday + Resnick, and doing a large number of the exercises, would be one good way to go about it. (Look for used copies of previous editions on Amazon -- they'll be cheap.) Ther…

How does Halliday + Resnick compare to Young + Freedman?

Good question. I'm not personally familiar with Young + Freedman so I can't compare.

Re: Ask HN: How to self-study physics?

#73

There are a few themes that physics revolves around: 1. Action Principle: A lot of problems in mechanics can be boiled down to writing down the correct Lagrangian. 2. Statistical physics, this teaches you about to think in terms of "Zustandssummen" and is the starting point for deriving lots of interesting laws like black body radiation. 3. Field (Gauge) Theory, turns out you can write down and derive interesting Lag…

"A lot of problems in mechanics can be boiled down to writing down the correct Lagrangian."

There's something that intuitively sounds very right about that...

This list seems very interesting...

I will have to explore all of these areas in greater detail... I'm not a physicist by profession, but I find most of your list's topics fascinating...

Re: Ask HN: How to self-study physics?

#74
For the love of God, don't use Feynman lectures to learn physics. That's something you read after you know physics, for relaxation and conceptual stuff. Resnick & Halliday is a much better freshman/sophomore book.

Susskind's "theoretical minimum" is actually pretty good.

http://theoreticalminimum.com/courses

Fowler gives a pretty conventional undergraduate physics curriculum (adding Feynman in there somehow). If it were me: learn the math tools first. I assume you know linear algebra; learn differential equations. From there, go straight to higher level books. There's very little difference in undergraduate vs graduate quantum mechanics and E&M other than the math is slightly more sophisticated in grad school. Might as well do it right. Messiah for QM and Jackson for E&M. Classical mechanics, the tradition is to learn Lagrangian mechanics in high level undergrad and Hamiltonian in grad school. There's no real reason to do it in this order, and a decent reason (understanding Quantum) to do it in reverse order. Amusingly, the math is cleaner in Hamiltonian mechanics, but you may find yourself unable to do some simple problems you can do with Newtonian physics; so this will be a weird working backward thing. Stat Mech, I think you should just read Reif; skip Ma or whatever they use in grad school now.

FWIIW I know/knew people who did this: started grad school without having done any undergrad courses in physics. I think skipping a lot of the introductory stuff, and visiting it later is actually better.

The rest of it can be done with the same machinery you learned in QM, E&M, Mechanics and Stat Mech. Max leverage if you had to pick one: probably classical mechanics for a DL guy, E&M for general knowledge of tools.

I'd suggest not actually trying to simulate physical systems on a computer: you probably stare at computers too much anyway.

Re: Ask HN: How to self-study physics?

#76

For the love of God, don't use Feynman lectures to learn physics. That's something you read after you know physics, for relaxation and conceptual stuff. Resnick & Halliday is a much better freshman/sophomore book. Susskind's "theoretical minimum" is actually pretty good. http://theoreticalminimum.com/courses Fowler gives a pretty conventional undergraduate physics curriculum (adding Feynman in there somehow). If it w…

"For the love of God, don't use Feynman lectures to learn physics. That's something you read after you know physics, for relaxation and conceptual stuff..."

Agree with this 100%. To learn math or physics you have to do it, experiment, and all that.

Re: Ask HN: How to self-study physics?

#78
Find the source outline for an undergraduate physics program at a university you like. Find equivalent offerings of those courses for free (YouTube, etc). Watch a couple lectures per day, taking notes, doing the homeworks. 4-5 years later, you're done. : ^ )

Re: Ask HN: How to self-study physics?

#79
I dunno but I think I once came across a reddit post about a user who asked how they can understand the bits and bites of electronics and they were reffered to a book which I don't really know its title and its what I currently looking for.

I need some help to remember this book.

Re: Ask HN: How to self-study physics?

#80

For the love of God, don't use Feynman lectures to learn physics. That's something you read after you know physics, for relaxation and conceptual stuff. Resnick & Halliday is a much better freshman/sophomore book. Susskind's "theoretical minimum" is actually pretty good. http://theoreticalminimum.com/courses Fowler gives a pretty conventional undergraduate physics curriculum (adding Feynman in there somehow). If it w…

HRK is for learning physics, feynman is for feeling like you're learning physics when you aren't, and ll is for feeling like you're understanding nothing.

LL and Feynman are definitely nice to look back upon though.

Post reply on HN