Register to reply 
What's the maths equivalent of the Feynman Lectures? 
Share this thread: 
#1
Nov1907, 09:47 AM

P: 6

Hi,
I've got a Masters in Physics, but always feel that I'm missing out slightly by not knowing and appreciating the beauty that there is in all the maths I never had cause to study in my physics degree. Is there a book (or set of books) that does for maths what the Feynman Lectures do for physics? As in books that take relative novices and then give them a good understanding of the subject. I think Feynman only assumed a knowledge of as much calculus as you could fit on a postcard and then took them through the first two years of a university degree, which might be a greater challenge for a book on maths. Anyway, does anyone have any recommendations? Thanks. 


#2
Nov1907, 02:41 PM

Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 2,020

Maybe What is Mathematics? by Courant and Robbins, or Matters Mathematical by Herstein and Kaplansky (you can get this for $6 from abebooks.com).



#3
Nov1907, 03:31 PM

P: 1,076

Here is a link to What is Mathematics http://www.amazon.com/MathematicsEl...7755457002437



#4
Nov1907, 03:45 PM

Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 9,453

What's the maths equivalent of the Feynman Lectures?
what is math, courant calculus 2 volumes, apostol calculus 2 volumes.



#5
Nov2007, 03:59 AM

P: 6

Thanks. What Is Mathematics? certainly looks good. I'm looking forward to it.



#7
Nov2107, 12:39 AM

P: 172

I'll try and dig up my old copy of "The Mathematics of The Strapless Evening Gown" or some such and send a link.
It was published both as a whimsical work, but with a mathematical perspective as a small publication rebuttal, or at least companion, to "A Stress Analysis of the Strapless Evening Gown" Granted it's only a single topic but in math, not unlike pharmacology, one takes solace where one finds it.... 


#8
Nov2107, 03:08 AM

P: 2,268

The thing is the soul of mathematics is about problem solving. So any book that dosen't have problems for the reader to solve will have missed a large chunk of mathematics.
Although Feyman dosen't have any problems in his book. I wonder why? 


#9
Nov2107, 04:25 AM

HW Helper
P: 3,352

From what I've seen, no one in mathematics has summed up so eloquently yet simply the essence of some aspect of maths, as Feynman did for quantum theory. Feynman is renowned for being a genius of the first class, who behaved just like a normal bloke off the street. He played poker (and was exceptionally good at it), he liked practical jokes and traveling abroad. That sort of made him for accessible to the lay man, and though I can think of people who are studying mathematics yet are just average people who do average things, none of them are genius as the rank of Feynman. The entire world got a bit dumber when he died.
I could be wrong, and just have not heard about an equivalent though. 


#10
Nov2107, 10:27 AM

P: 1,295

As to why Feynman didn't include any exercises, maybe he thought students should spend more time learning the content then learning how to jump through hoops. 


#11
Nov2107, 11:04 AM

P: 6

You forgot to mention his great skills as a bongo player. 


#12
Nov2107, 02:57 PM

P: 75



#13
Nov2107, 03:25 PM

Sci Advisor
P: 2,340

[EDIT: just noticed that Xevarion just beat me to the draw in recommending PCM!]



#14
Nov2107, 03:49 PM

P: 75




#15
Nov2107, 04:44 PM

P: 82

 Assaf Physically Incorrect 


#16
Nov2107, 07:21 PM

P: 2,268




#17
Nov2207, 04:42 PM

Sci Advisor
P: 2,340

In a half dozen threads similar to this one, including at least two recent threads, I recommended the book by Kac and Ulam, Mathematics and Logic, Dover reprint. The recommendation stands, but although this is tedious, I should add a correction every time I mention this book. Late in the book (p. 118119 in the Dover reprint) the discussion of the braid group is flawed by what might be a misprint followed by what certainly seems to be a very odd brain blip. In the braid group on four strands, the relations satisfied by the generators [itex]A_1, \, A_2, \, A_3[/itex] should be
[tex] A_1 \, A_2 \, A_1 = A_2 \, A_1 \, A_2, \; A_2 \, A_3 \, A_2 = A_3 \, A_2 \, A_3, \; A_1 \, A_3 = A_3 \, A_1, \; A_1^2 = A_2^2 = A_3^2 = I [/tex] This is one instance where the WP article, in this case Braid group, is correct (in the version cited, at least), but a widely read book by two leading mathematicians contains inexplicable errors! But I must unfortunately add that nonetheless WP is inherently unstable and unreliable and cannot be safely used as a reference except by experts who may be able to spot vandalism (e.g. maliciously flipping a sign), honest misstatements, and misleading portrayal of a fringe POV as "mainstream" [sic], where laypersons probably would be misled, perhaps seriously. 


#18
Nov2207, 07:13 PM

P: 7

i'm in the same boat. i hear What is Mathematics, and Mathematics: Its Content, Method, and Meaning are good for undergrad math.



Register to reply 
Related Discussions  
Feynman lectures  General Discussion  11  
The Feynman Lectures  Science & Math Textbooks  5  
Feynman Qedlectures  Quantum Physics  1  
The Feynman Lectures  General Physics  12  
Feynman lectures mp3  General Discussion  20 