How good are the MIT introductory physics series?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The MIT Introductory Physics Series, particularly the works by AP French, is considered decently written but overly verbose, making it less suitable as a primary textbook compared to alternatives like Halliday and Resnick. Users have noted that while the series covers fundamental topics such as Newtonian Mechanics, it may not be the best choice for comprehensive study due to its outdated content. The discussion highlights a lack of familiarity with other areas like quantum mechanics, optics, and relativity within the series.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Newtonian Mechanics
  • Familiarity with AP French's physics textbooks
  • Basic knowledge of quantum mechanics and optics
  • Awareness of textbook comparison criteria
NEXT STEPS
  • Research Halliday and Resnick's physics textbooks for comparison
  • Explore updated resources on quantum mechanics and optics
  • Investigate MIT OpenCourseWare offerings for supplemental learning
  • Review user feedback on various physics textbooks for comprehensive understanding
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in physics, particularly those evaluating introductory physics resources and seeking alternatives to traditional textbooks.

Physicaa
Messages
53
Reaction score
1
I was wondering, are the MIT introductory series any good compared to, let's say, Halliday and Resnick ?

Any opninion ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
MIT opencourseware you mean?
 
I like AP French's Newtonian Mechanics, I think it's decently written, but it's quite wordy and probably wouldn't hold up as a main textbook when there are so many other good ones out there.

As for the others, I can't comment, I haven't taken QM, optics, or relativity yet. I've been told that the series is a little outdated.

http://books.wwnorton.com/books/book-template.aspx?ser=The+M.I.T.+Introductory+Physics+Series

I think you're referring to this series?
 
Mondayman said:
I like AP French's Newtonian Mechanics, I think it's decently written, but it's quite wordy and probably wouldn't hold up as a main textbook when there are so many other good ones out there.

As for the others, I can't comment, I haven't taken QM, optics, or relativity yet. I've been told that the series is a little outdated.

http://books.wwnorton.com/books/book-template.aspx?ser=The+M.I.T.+Introductory+Physics+Series

I think you're referring to this series?
Yes, these ones
 
micromass said:
MIT opencourseware you mean?
No, I mean the books written by AP French.
 

Similar threads

Classical Trying to pinpoint the name of an old mechanics textbook
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Intro Physics Looking for an Introductory Physics Book without Flashy Presentation?
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
6K
Classical Calculus-based physics textbooks
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Good resources for learning basic surface tension
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Classical What Are Some General Physics Books to Complement Resnick and Halliday?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Self teaching Calculus for physics?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
Astronomy Good Book Recommendations on Solar Physics
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Intro Physics Physics Introduction book
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
Classical What are the best intermediate Newtonian mechanics textbooks?
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
6K
Solid State Which Introductory Solid State Physics Book from Springer is Best?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K