Best book to learn some maths methods?

  • Thread starter Thread starter aeroboyo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Book
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on finding suitable math books for a student transitioning from pre-linear algebra to multivariable calculus, with aspirations of pursuing a theoretical physics degree. The user is considering "Mathematical Methods for the Physical Sciences" by Boas but is unsure if it emphasizes proofs and theory or focuses solely on practical applications. Participants highlight the distinction between math books aimed at engineers, which prioritize calculations, and those for mathematicians, which delve into proofs. It is suggested that early math education in the sciences often emphasizes calculation, with proof-focused courses like topology being beneficial later on. The conversation underscores the importance of selecting resources that align with the user's goal of mastering math for physics.
aeroboyo
Messages
69
Reaction score
0
hello,

I'd like to learn some basic math methods from linear algebra to multivariable calculus. At the moment I'm at a pre-linear algebra level, I've had one semester of calculus. I'm aware of 'Mathematical Methods for the Physical Sciences' by Boas, but i have some reservations.

I want to learn maths 'correctly' for my intentions. By that i mean, i'd like to learn it so that i could commence on a theoretical physics degree. I get the impression that there are two basic types of maths books, those that are more for engineers (with no proofs and they just want you to apply formulas) and others which might be more inclined towards mathematicians in that they explain proofs and theories behind the maths. Which kind of book should a PHYSICS student benefit most from? Which leads to the question, is 'Mathematical Methods for the Physical Sciences' by Boas suitable for the aspiring physicist (does it contain proofs and theory behind the maths) or is it best suited for the aspiring engineer (does it just teach the student how to apply formulas to solve problems?).
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Here is a good site:

http://www.maths.mq.edu.au/~wchen/ln.html
 
courtrigrad said:
Here is a good site:

http://www.maths.mq.edu.au/~wchen/ln.html

Great site, courtrigrad. Btw, you may want to post it in the tutorial section if it's not already there.
 
aeroboyo said:
I want to learn maths 'correctly' for my intentions.

I thought you were an engineering student?

There's nothing incorrect about learning how to calculate, as much as some of the math students here may disdain that. The first couple of years of a math education in the sciences at the college level typically concentrate on calculation. Later you might want to take a course that concentrates on proofs. Topology is usually good for that.
 
i am an engineering student... but i will be transfering into physics next year!
 
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Back
Top