A Good, Clear, Introductory Text?

  • Thread starter Thread starter lrl4565
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Introductory Text
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around the challenges faced when starting to learn physics, particularly with the book "Physics for Dummies," which has been criticized for its confusing terminology and concepts. The user seeks a clearer textbook and is considering Halliday and Resnick's works, specifically the 1978 edition of "Physics" versus the newer "Fundamentals of Physics." There is a consensus that while the newer edition may be more accessible, it is also seen as less rigorous. Participants suggest that older editions are still valuable and that the frequent updates to textbooks are primarily driven by publisher interests rather than significant content changes. The user has a basic understanding of calculus but lacks formal physics education, emphasizing the need for clarity in the material they choose.
lrl4565
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
So, I started with "Physics for Dummies", but it quickly became confusing. They use speed and velocity interchangeably... calling acceleration the rate at which speed changes, talking about negative speed, telling me that vector a + vector b = vector c. After internet research, I'm pretty sure these things are not right.

I want a textbook that is, above all, CLEAR.

I've been hearing things about Halliday and Resnick. I was thinking about purchasing the 1978 version of "Physics". Is there a difference between this and the newer Fundamentals of Physics?

https://www.amazon.com/dp/047134530X/?tag=pfamazon01-20

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0471320579/?tag=pfamazon01-20

About my math and science background:

I have never taken any physics courses. I took Calculus last year (in high school, with an engineering textbook), and have a fairly decent grasp of the concepts, but am not strong.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I highly recommend that edition of H&R "Physics".

"Fundamentals of Physics" is watered down, but should still be fine.

The only reason new editions of these texts keep coming out is to keep the publisher from losing money to the used textbook market. You're not missing anything by getting older editions.
 
For the following four books, has anyone used them in a course or for self study? Compiler Construction Principles and Practice 1st Edition by Kenneth C Louden Programming Languages Principles and Practices 3rd Edition by Kenneth C Louden, and Kenneth A Lambert Programming Languages 2nd Edition by Allen B Tucker, Robert E Noonan Concepts of Programming Languages 9th Edition by Robert W Sebesta If yes to either, can you share your opinions about your personal experience using them. I...
Hi, I have notice that Ashcroft, Mermin and Wei worked at a revised edition of the original solid state physics book (here). The book, however, seems to be never available. I have also read that the reason is related to some disputes related to copyright. Do you have any further information about it? Did you have the opportunity to get your hands on this revised edition? I am really curious about it, also considering that I am planning to buy the book in the near future... Thanks!
I’ve heard that in some countries (for example, Argentina), the curriculum is structured differently from the typical American program. In the U.S., students usually take a general physics course first, then move on to a textbook like Griffiths, and only encounter Jackson at the graduate level. In contrast, in those countries students go through a general physics course (such as Resnick-Halliday) and then proceed directly to Jackson. If the slower, more gradual approach is considered...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
12K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top