Studying How to self-study physics past High School Level?

[TensorCalculus]

This is a good book on thermodynamics: https://www.amazon.com/Block-Histor...hermodynamics/dp/0198851553?tag=pfamazon01-20

Yes - it does look great. Unfortunately I don't have $72.00 to spare (or - well, $40 at least ) so I'll try the course.(the bookfinder you recommended me came in useful)

I was thirteen 60 years ago so my examples are dated but you can find modern inexpensive equivalents. I operated a HAM radio transmitter/receiver built with my sister from a kit. We both learned Morse code that came in handy in computer science. I rewired a stereo FM receiver for quadraphonic (4 speaker), added audio from an old B&W television, then designed and built a remote control from a few parts. I helped repair electric appliances and learned how toasters, refrigerators, and TVs operated.

This sounds so cool - I've been spontaneously inspired to make something when I get home from school

If hands-on physics appeals to you, PF has a a do-it-yourself (DIY) forum with many modern projects. Always underfunded as a teen, consider surplus and second-hand equipment. I imagine local RAF and RN bases encourage young scientists with workshops, surplus EM gear and old textbooks and manuals. As a teen in Silicon Valley (Santa Clara County, CA) I attended science fairs, open houses and workshops at SRI International and NASA Ames Research Center, later working at both as an adult software engineer. UK contains many research centers.

Yes - it does! I haven't seen it yet (newbie here...) but I'll take a look. Luckily for me I live in a very academic city, and both my parents are software engineers so when it comes to DIY with electromagnetism I have a lot of resources. What's RN? (RAF is royal air force... right?)

Astronomy and cosmology teach us so much about the Universe. I shared a basic reflector telescope with my sister, sketching moons while she photographed using a home made adaptor. We also attended shows at our local planetarium and visited a nearby observatory on Mount Lick. Consider Isaac Newton experimented with Optics while co-inventing Calculus.

yes - that's why I am such a big fan. My father is a hobbyist astrophotographer so I have the privilege of owning a telescope - and some of the things I've seen are utterly breathtaking.

 

[Homelilly]

Oh - ok. That makes sense, and I do really need to get a good thermo course (I literally know like ideal gases things (eg. maxwell boltzmann distribution, ideal gas law) and entropy and that's it haha)

yeah I did take a look at the fees because I have friends internationally and was going to tell them about it. They allow international/privately educated students in for a fee of £25 a week (when it is live)

Thanks! It sounds very interesting, I have never heard about it.

 

[TensorCalculus]

Thanks! It sounds very interesting, I have never heard about it.

Yes - me neither (you have Muu9 to thank for the discovery). Oxford uni is (somewhat) in charge of the UK physics Olympiads, so any physics tutoring from them will probably be of quite good quality! What year/grade are you in - do you think you'll do it?

 

[Klystron]

What's RN? (RAF is royal air force... right?)

My bad. I usually write out acronyms on first use. Yes, Royal Air Force and Royal Navy. I once served in a Kingdom where we said Royal Thai Air Force (RTAF) and Royal Thai Navy (RTN) to be polite.

 

[Albertus Magnus]

So glad that you are interested in physics! Those who can do physics should do physics. At any rate the first thing you will study at university will be a freshman physics with calculus type course. We used the popular text by Haliday, Resnick and Walker, this is a classic intro text that has stood the test of time. It provides an intro to mechanics in addition to a brief survey of thermal, electromagnetics, optics and some other topics. Typically this course allows you to get the foundation you need for physics while developing your calculus skills in a calculus I, II & II study.
If you are mathematically competent up through differential equations, then you may well want to try something more advanced like Analytical Mechanics by Fowles and Cassidy or Introduction to Mechanics by Kleppner and Kolenkow; (sophomore/junior level physics) where the last two have been listed in the order of increasing difficulty.
Make sure that you can do all the problems and have mastered the stuff in Haliday and Resnick, further be sure to study mechanics thoroughly before attempting to tackle electromagnetism or quantum mechanics, thermal physics or relativity, as classical mechanics is foundational to the whole of physics and must be mastered at the outset.
If you absolutely must wet your beak with some modern physics consider David Griffith's Revolutions in twentieth Century Physics and David Tong's particle physics course. Finally, when not studying physics commit yourself to studying more and more mathematics: calculus through multivariables and vector analysis, linear algebra, ordinary differential equations, partial differential equations, and complex analysis. Get these topics from a mathematical methods type text such as those from M. Boas, Walker, Arfken, Dennery & Kryswicki or some other good text, however, avoid going off too deep into more purely mathematical texts for a good while as these will tend to take you too far afield in a direction not needed for physics.
Good luck to you in all your academic endeavors!

 

[Mozibur Rahman Ullah]

I'm surprised that nobody has suggested Feynman's Lectures on Physics. There are 3 volumes. They are designed for a university undergraduate curriculum. But a bright teenager should be able to get something out them. Also try out his popular books - it was one of those that inspired me to study physics.

In terms of mathematics, calculus is obviously key as well as linear algebra. You need to become familiar with second order differential equations and how to solve them. From what you've written, it sounds you are familiar with this. Your next step should be learning vector calculus. This is important for classical electromagnetism. This is where you learn about line, surface and volume integrals as well as grad, curl and div and why they're important for and how they're connected to integrals. For more advanced stuff like relativity, learning tensor calculus is important. This branch of mathematics is part of what's called differential geometry.

Its important to realise that mathematicians use mathematics in different ways and motivations than physicists and this difference becomes all the wider as you go deeper into the subject. Differential geometry is a generalisation of vector calculus to curved space and higher dimensions. Both important in general relativity. It also unifies vector analysis in that grad, curl and div are shown to be aspects of a single differential operator - the exterior differential and its also unifies the integral theorems you learn in vector calculus in that they're all shown to be special cases of Stoke's theorem.

Good Luck!

 

[TensorCalculus]

So glad that you are interested in physics! Those who can do physics should do physics

...

At any rate the first thing you will study at university will be a freshman physics with calculus type course. We used the popular text by Haliday, Resnick and Walker, this is a classic intro text that has stood the test of time. It provides an intro to mechanics in addition to a brief survey of thermal, electromagnetics, optics and some other topics. Typically this course allows you to get the foundation you need for physics while developing your calculus skills in a calculus I, II & II study.

Welp - it's quite expensive. It does look like a really useful book though, and if you recommend it so highly to learn the fundamentals of physics, I'll definitely consider it.

If you are mathematically competent up through differential equations, then you may well want to try something more advanced like Analytical Mechanics by Fowles and Cassidy or Introduction to Mechanics by Kleppner and Kolenkow; (sophomore/junior level physics) where the last two have been listed in the order of increasing difficulty.

Make sure that you can do all the problems and have mastered the stuff in Haliday and Resnick, further be sure to study mechanics thoroughly before attempting to tackle electromagnetism or quantum mechanics, thermal physics or relativity, as classical mechanics is foundational to the whole of physics and must be mastered at the outset.

These ones certainly seem more affordable. I am competent up till DEQs I guess, but I might still make sure I know the content from Haliday and Resnick (even if it's just by looking at the covered content online, if I can't manage to convince my parents to lend me like £50) as you said - I don't want to end up skipping something important

If you absolutely must wet your beak with some modern physics consider David Griffith's Revolutions in twentieth Century Physics and David Tong's particle physics course. Finally, when not studying physics commit yourself to studying more and more mathematics: calculus through multivariables and vector analysis, linear algebra, ordinary differential equations, partial differential equations, and complex analysis. Get these topics from a mathematical methods type text such as those from M. Boas, Walker, Arfken, Dennery & Kryswicki or some other good text, however, avoid going off too deep into more purely mathematical texts for a good while as these will tend to take you too far afield in a direction not needed for physics.

Modern Physics absolutely appeals to me - but I guess since I'm a real beginner I might be better off covering all of the classical mechanics and doing the courses people have mentioned to me first. I'll keep the book in mind though! As for mathematics, I'll avoid really pure mathematical texts then. I definitely need to commit myself more to maths, and I'll try finding the texts you've mentioned - thank you!

Good luck to you in all your academic endeavors!

Thank you very much!

 

[TensorCalculus]

I'm surprised that nobody has suggested Feynman's Lectures on Physics. There are 3 volumes. They are designed for a university undergraduate curriculum. But a bright teenager should be able to get something out them. Also try out his popular books - it was one of those that inspired me to study physics.

I've read them, and they're great (well, volume one and 2, I can't seem to get my hands on a copy of 3)! I do also enjoy some of feynman's popular books - he really has a talent for making things seem so simple.

Your next step should be learning vector calculus. This is important for classical electromagnetism. This is where you learn about line, surface and volume integrals as well as grad, curl and div and why they're important for and how they're connected to integrals. For more advanced stuff like relativity, learning tensor calculus is important. This branch of mathematics is part of what's called differential geometry.

My vector calculus is extremely rudimentary, that's true. I've learnt line and surface integrals but I do need to learn volume integrals and things like grad div and curl, not to mention tensor calculus (my username comes from the tensor calculus seen in CS when working with things such as pytorch or tensorflow... my physics tensor calculus skills are nonexistent). Do you have anything you recommend, aside from the resources I've already been referred to?

Its important to realise that mathematicians use mathematics in different ways and motivations than physicists and this difference becomes all the wider as you go deeper into the subject. Differential geometry is a generalisation of vector calculus to curved space and higher dimensions. Both important in general relativity. It also unifies vector analysis in that grad, curl and div are shown to be aspects of a single differential operator - the exterior differential and its also unifies the integral theorems you learn in vector calculus in that they're all shown to be special cases of Stoke's theorem.

Yes - this has come to my attention the past few days with what everyone has been telling me! I am yet to learn much differential geometry at all, but from what I've learnt online it sounds really interesting and something I might have looked into just for the fun of the maths, even if it weren't important for physics.

Good Luck!

Thank you!!

 

[Muu9]

I found this interesting comment:
I have heard good things about Visual Differential Geometry and Forms by Tristan Needham, but it's about 32 pounds used on bookfinder.
Are there any university libraries you could enter, even if you can't borrow the books inside?

 

[Muu9]

One additional option: consider explaining your situation to your school librarian or a local public librarian. They might be able to request a copy from another library (Inter Library Loan) or know of local university libraries that are open to the public and have the book(s) you need

 

[TensorCalculus]

I have heard good things about Visual Differential Geometry and Forms by Tristan Needham, but it's about 32 pounds used on bookfinder.

That price might actually be doable - I have like £35 worth of random saved cash...

Are there any university libraries you could enter, even if you can't borrow the books inside?

I think Cambridge University and Trinity College have libraries open to the public, but I don't live near enough to go on my own and my parents can't exactly drop me often...

consider explaining your situation to your school librarian or a local public librarian. They might be able to request a copy from another library (Inter Library Loan) or know of local university libraries that are open to the public and have the book(s) you need

This is actually a very feasible option. I'm currently on a scholarship at a really nice private school (COMPOS said that if in a private school on bursary/scholarship they might consider providing it for free thank the lords), that's quite academic and probably has the kinds of links that can get me the books I want. (shocking that I didn't think of it beforehand - thank you for the idea!)
Also I can't see the comment. Probably some kind of network problems.

 

[fresh_42]

That price might actually be doable - I have like £35 worth of random saved cash...

Don't forget that the internet nowadays provides dozens of good lecture notes for free. As long as you aren't focused on a certain lecturer, you can find excellent (and English) sources on many university servers in the world.

 

[TensorCalculus]

Don't forget that the internet nowadays provides dozens of good lecture notes for free. As long as you aren't focused on a certain lecturer, you can find excellent (and English) sources on many university servers in the world.

True, I really should utilize lecture notes more. I tend to just skim read them after watching the lecture and never come back...........

 

[fresh_42]

True, I really should utilize lecture notes more. I tend to just skim read them after watching the lecture and never come back...........

It is one of the things I like about science. It doesn't care where it is written.

 

[Mozibur Rahman Ullah]

I've read them, and they're great (well, volume one and 2, I can't seem to get my hands on a copy of 3)! I do also enjoy some of feynman's popular books - he really has a talent for making things seem so simple.

My vector calculus is extremely rudimentary, that's true. I've learnt line and surface integrals but I do need to learn volume integrals and things like grad div and curl, not to mention tensor calculus (my username comes from the tensor calculus seen in CS when working with things such as pytorch or tensorflow... my physics tensor calculus skills are nonexistent). Do you have anything you recommend, aside from the resources I've already been referred to?

Yes - this has come to my attention the past few days with what everyone has been telling me! I am yet to learn much differential geometry at all, but from what I've learnt online it sounds really interesting and something I might have looked into just for the fun of the maths, even if it weren't important for physics.

Thank you!!

It's probably worth pointing out - if it isn't obvious to you - that the calculus of differential forms that you will come across in any differential geometry course is basically tensor calculus. Given your handle, I thought it important to point this out ;-). The course that I like is John Lee's 3 volume set on manifolds covering topological, smooth and Riemannian manifolds. However it's aimed at mathematicians, so it may not be appropriate you. Another book which is lovely and an easy read and which also covers differential geometry is Baez & Muniain's Gauge Fields, Knots & Gravity. Although they cover advanced material they do it in such a breezy style that its a delight to read.

I've read them, and they're great (well, volume one and 2, I can't seem to get my hands on a copy of 3)! I do also enjoy some of feynman's popular books - he really has a talent for making things seem so simple.

My vector calculus is extremely rudimentary, that's true. I've learnt line and surface integrals but I do need to learn volume integrals and things like grad div and curl, not to mention tensor calculus (my username comes from the tensor calculus seen in CS when working with things such as pytorch or tensorflow... my physics tensor calculus skills are nonexistent). Do you have anything you recommend, aside from the resources I've already been referred to?

Yes - this has come to my attention the past few days with what everyone has been telling me! I am yet to learn much differential geometry at all, but from what I've learnt online it sounds really interesting and something I might have looked into just for the fun of the maths, even if it weren't important for physics.

Thank you!!

It's worth pointing out that the calculus of differential forms that you will come across in any course on differential geometry is basically tensor calculus. I thought it important to point this out given your handle ;-). A lovely book that covers this is Baez & Muniain's Gauge Fields, Knots and Gravity. They cover advanced topics but they do it in such a breezy style that its a delight to read. They don't however cover all the technical details. One set of books that does is John Lee's 3 volume course on topological, smooth and Riemannian manifolds. However, they're aimed at mathematicians. He is however, a very clear writer.

 

[TensorCalculus]

It is one of the things I like about science. It doesn't care where it is written.

This is going on my "favourite quotes of all time" list

It's probably worth pointing out - if it isn't obvious to you - that the calculus of differential forms that you will come across in any differential geometry course is basically tensor calculus. Given your handle, I thought it important to point this out ;-).

What - really? I mean I guess they're doing similar things, but surely they're at least somewhat different? I see people operating on entire tensors at once (like I do when I do coding sometimes, except the computer's doing all the hard work for me in that case) - is that actually the same thing as integrating over a vector field (such as when looking at line integrals, surface integrals etc in things such as Gauss's law and Ampere's law?)

The course that I like is John Lee's 3 volume set on manifolds covering topological, smooth and Riemannian manifolds. However it's aimed at mathematicians, so it may not be appropriate you. Another book which is lovely and an easy read and which also covers differential geometry is Baez & Muniain's Gauge Fields, Knots & Gravity. Although they cover advanced material they do it in such a breezy style that its a delight to read.

Sounds good! I might take a look even if it's aimed at mathematicians, Physics may be my passion (and I do therefore steer away from abstract maths) but I am a huge maths nerd too and do enjoy maths just for the fun of it :D

 

[Albertus Magnus]

...

Welp - it's quite expensive. It does look like a really useful book though, and if you recommend it so highly to learn the fundamentals of physics, I'll definitely consider it.


These ones certainly seem more affordable. I am competent up till DEQs I guess, but I might still make sure I know the content from Haliday and Resnick (even if it's just by looking at the covered content online, if I can't manage to convince my parents to lend me like £50) as you said - I don't want to end up skipping something important

I haven't checked on these specific titles, but I often buy physics texts at thrift books or on Ebay, for example I just got an older edition but still perfectly useful copy of Gradshteyn and Rhyzik $20.00 on ebay, whereas a new copy would have cost me about $200.00. A copy of Haliday and Resnick from the 1970s would be just about as good as a more updated copy, and I bet it would be quite affordable. Foundational type subjects like classical mechanics don't change too fast, however, subjects like astronomy on the other hand have developed so much in the last 20 years that it pays to buy newer texts.

 

[Albertus Magnus]

I just wanted to add: the Feynmann Lectures on Physics are available free online and they are awesome! He covers classical mechanics, electromagnetism and quantum While teaching some maths along the way. This would be a good place to get some of that vector calculus.

 

[jtbell]

it's [Halliday/Resnick/Walker] quite expensive.

For self study, there's no need to buy the current edition. Used copies a few editions back, whatever you can find cheaply, are fine for that purpose.

In the US at least, instructors usually assign homework exercises out of the textbook, and often assign specific pages or sections for reading. Publishers change up the book's layout, exercises, etc. in new editions, in order to discourage students from buying used books from others who have already taken the course. At the introductory level, many students are not physics majors, will not be studying physics further, see no reason to keep the book as a reference, and therefore happy to sell their copies if they can.

 

[Muu9]

Halliday Resnick Walker is roughly at the same level as University Physics by Young and Freedman, so I wouldn't bother with the former for someone who has completed the latter.

Here's another idea: ask university libraries in driving distance when they will update their copies of physics/math texts, which usually involves throwing out the old editions, so you can pick them up for dirt cheap or free.

 

[Mozibur Rahman Ullah]

This is going on my "favourite quotes of all time" list

What - really? I mean I guess they're doing similar things, but surely they're at least somewhat different? I see people operating on entire tensors at once (like I do when I do coding sometimes, except the computer's doing all the hard work for me in that case) - is that actually the same thing as integrating over a vector field (such as when looking at line integrals, surface integrals etc in things such as Gauss's law and Ampere's law?)

Sounds good! I might take a look even if it's aimed at mathematicians, Physics may be my passion (and I do therefore steer away from abstract maths) but I am a huge maths nerd too and do enjoy maths just for the fun of it :D

> What - really?

Yeah, it was a surprise to me too! If you're familiar with tensors then you should know that they're classified as covariant and contravariant tensors as well as into symmetric and antisymmetric tensors. We also differentiate between tensors and tensor fields in the same way that vectors are different from vector fields. Often tensor fields are just called tensors. Differential forms are precisely covariant and antisymmetric tensor fields.

The study of differential forms and manifolds differs from that of tensors in physics in that they use coordinate free formalisms and hence they come without indices though you can introduce indices if you want to work locally.

>is that actually the same thing as integrating over a vector field (such as when looking at line integrals, surface integrals etc in things such as Gauss's law and Ampere's law?)

In differential geometry it is natural to integrate differential forms over a manifold. This is because we can define it using only the smooth structure and without using a metric. It's one of the important uses of differential forms. This subsumes the notion of line, surface and volume integrals into one formalism. The reason why we can integrate vector fields over curves, surfaces and volumes in vector analysis is to do with the implicit use of the metric here. Also Greens's theorem, the Kelvin-Stokes theorem and the divergence theorems are all aapects of one theorem in differential geometry which is called Stokes theorem.

>Sounds good! I might take a look even if it's aimed at mathematicians ...

In that case I'd recommend the volume on smooth manifolds as that covers differential forms and also the volume on Riemannian geometry as that covers the geometry used in general relativity. I'd also dip into volume one for the definition of a topological manifold as that defines a manifold as simply as possible - it's just a space that looks locally like a Euclidean space. I've also said this before but I'll repeat it because its such an excellant book, have a look into Baez & Muniain - Gauge Fields, Knots & Gravity as they teach differential geomeyry whilst keeping an eye on the physics its used for.

 

[TensorCalculus]

I haven't checked on these specific titles, but I often buy physics texts at thrift books or on Ebay, for example I just got an older edition but still perfectly useful copy of Gradshteyn and Rhyzik $20.00 on ebay, whereas a new copy would have cost me about $200.00.

I've checked for used copies too - my go-to is Ebay. Nothing below £70 :(

A copy of Haliday and Resnick from the 1970s would be just about as good as a more updated copy, and I bet it would be quite affordable. Foundational type subjects like classical mechanics don't change too fast, however, subjects like astronomy on the other hand have developed so much in the last 20 years that it pays to buy newer texts.

True - I'll take a look then. Hopefully they won't be above £20!

I just wanted to add: the Feynmann Lectures on Physics are available free online and they are awesome! He covers classical mechanics, electromagnetism and quantum While teaching some maths along the way. This would be a good place to get some of that vector calculus.

I've already read them (well... volumes 1 and 2). They are brilliant - you're right!

For self study, there's no need to buy the current edition. Used copies a few editions back, whatever you can find cheaply, are fine for that purpose.

In the US at least, instructors usually assign homework exercises out of the textbook, and often assign specific pages or sections for reading. Publishers change up the book's layout, exercises, etc. in new editions, in order to discourage students from buying used books from others who have already taken the course. At the introductory level, many students are not physics majors, will not be studying physics further, see no reason to keep the book as a reference, and therefore happy to sell their copies if they can.

That's what I do - but I don;t think as someone from the UK I'll be able to get my hand on any American physics majors (I don't think textbooks are used the same way here... maybe. If they are, I have a few people I know studying physics in Uni, I might be able to borrow some books form them)

Halliday Resnick Walker is roughly at the same level as University Physics by Young and Freedman, so I wouldn't bother with the former for someone who has completed the latter.

Here's another idea: ask university libraries in driving distance when they will update their copies of physics/math texts, which usually involves throwing out the old editions, so you can pick them up for dirt cheap or free.

Oh - I thought Haliday Resnick Walker might be Harder. I did love Young and Freedman though, and learnt a lot, so if I can get a copy of Haliday Resnick Walker at a reasonable price, I'll read it - I think it might have some valuable stuff for me (hopefully). I get where you're coming from though - so I probably won't study it extensively or anything. About the library thing - that seems like a good idea. I'll find their contact :D

Yeah, it was a surprise to me too! If you're familiar with tensors then you should know that they're classified as covariant and contravariant tensors as well as into symmetric and antisymmetric tensors. We also differentiate between tensors and tensor fields in the same way that vectors are different from vector fields. Often tensor fields are just called tensors. Differential forms are precisely covariant and antisymmetric tensor fields.

I mean... I know of this -> (If you're familiar with tensors then you should know that they're classified as covariant and contravariant tensors as well as into symmetric and antisymmetric tensors.) but I don't know anything about doing maths with tensor fields...

In differential geometry it is natural to integrate differential forms over a manifold. This is because we can define it using only the smooth structure and without using a metric. It's one of the important uses of differential forms. This subsumes the notion of line, surface and volume integrals into one formalism. The reason why we can integrate vector fields over curves, surfaces and volumes in vector analysis is to do with the implicit use of the metric here. Also Greens's theorem, the Kelvin-Stokes theorem and the divergence theorems are all apects of one theorem in differential geometry which is called Stokes theorem.

Ahhhh - that makes so much sense, thanks! I never really thought about what I was doing when integrating vector fields over things such as curves - thank you for the insight!

In that case I'd recommend the volume on smooth manifolds as that covers differential forms and also the volume on Riemannian geometry as that covers the geometry used in general relativity. I'd also dip into volume one for the definition of a topological manifold as that defines a manifold as simply as possible - it's just a space that looks locally like a Euclidean space. I've also said this before but I'll repeat it because its such an excellant book, have a look into Baez & Muniain - Gauge Fields, Knots & Gravity as they teach differential geomeyry whilst keeping an eye on the physics its used for.

Alright! I'll take a look. I might work on my vector calc first though since it's not particularly strong. Thank you for the recommendation!

 

[sairoof]

Hello! So I'm a teenage physics enthusiast, who wants to take my knowledge past A-level (or in America I believe this would be high school level) physics.
I've studied multiple textbooks like Young and Freedman's University physics, studied maths from books like mathematical methods for physics and engineering.
I solidified all that by doing lots (like, LOTS) of the practice problems and some Olympiad papers.

I don't really know where to go from here.
I've resorted to surfing the internet, and finding free courses and watching YouTube videos that satisfy my interest, or reading popular science, reading high-school textbooks, and just sitting around.
I'm not entirely sure what books to buy - I fear that if I accidentally skip straight to something too advanced I'll not have strong basics. My teacher told me to just read popular science, but I really enjoy looking at the math behind things and I feel that there are few popular science books (that I've read at least) that satisfy my curiosity.
I do really, really love physics, and want to try and study it further - unfortunately, I'm 13 and have quite a long time till I can study physics in University/College.
Does anyone have any resources they would recommend to me (my interest particularly lies around astronomy and electromagnetism) , or any advice to give?

You are already doing it by visiting this website, :) there are tutorials, papers, and articles about almost every branch of physics.
But if you want something more "formal" and can be measured for 3rd parties (jobs and universities), I'd do a course on coursera, edX, or any reputable online teaching website.

 

[TensorCalculus]

You are already doing it by visiting this website, :) there are tutorials, papers, and articles about almost every branch of physics.

Yep! And since I've joined, I've really enjoyed looking at all of it too :D

But if you want something more "formal" and can be measured for 3rd parties (jobs and universities), I'd do a course on coursera, edX, or any reputable online teaching website.

Oh - taking courses online can help for jobs and Universities? I never even considered the possibility!

 

[sairoof]

Yep! And since I've joined, I've really enjoyed looking at all of it too :D

Oh - taking courses online can help for jobs and Universities? I never even considered the possibility!

To a certain degree. Not every company or country take these courses seriously, so see what's the situation in your area and then decide if they are worth the investment or not.
But also, a lot of these courses are actually free and you only need to pay if you want the certificate.

 

[TensorCalculus]

To a certain degree. Not every company or country take these courses seriously, so see what's the situation in your area and then decide if they are worth the investment or not.
But also, a lot of these courses are actually free and you only need to pay if you want the certificate.

Hmm... wow. I've taken my fair share of course on MIT Open Courseware (and recently, have been doing some form Yale etc as they were recommended on this feed). I wonder if they could be put on various applications. I'll check if they care about it much here in Britain.
Thank you for suggesting this!

 

[fresh_42]

The internet can be a dangerous place to learn something. You easily get distracted. Videos - in my opinion - sell the illusion of understanding without reassuring that insights were provided. You watch them, agree, and forget about them quicker than it took to watch them. I don't think that such a passive way of study can ultimately lead to insights you would alternatively gain by working through a subject with a lot of paper and ink. You already lost a lot of time by commenting here. If you were really interested, you would use every spare minute to learn more about a subject. The way from school to relativity theory and quantum mechanics is a long, winding one. The necessary mathematics alone is complicated and all but trivial. Curiosity should be your major stimulus. And then, it is relatively irrelevant what your resources are as long as they are from a university, a lecture note, or a good textbook.

 

[TensorCalculus]

The internet can be a dangerous place to learn something. You easily get distracted. Videos - in my opinion - sell the illusion of understanding without reassuring that insights were provided. You watch them, agree, and forget about them quicker than it took to watch them. I don't think that such a passive way of study can ultimately lead to insights you would alternatively gain by working through a subject with a lot of paper and ink.

Well... fair enough.

You already lost a lot of time by commenting here. If you were really interested, you would use every spare minute to learn more about a subject.

Yeah... I mean I tend to comment on little 5-10 minute pockets of time in school where I can't really do much else...

The way from school to relativity theory and quantum mechanics is a long, winding one. The necessary mathematics alone is complicated and all but trivial. Curiosity should be your major stimulus. And then, it is relatively irrelevant what your resources are as long as they are from a university, a lecture note, or a good textbook.

Fair (again). I think I've got all the answers that I've wanted, and a wealth of resources and advice from all of the wonderful people on PF! My goal was never relativity or QM, but I do understand that the path is long. I'll take some time to work through all the resources everyone has kindly provided me with, (and keep in mind all the advice!) Thank you everyone

 

[Mozibur Rahman Ullah]

The internet can be a dangerous place to learn something. You easily get distracted. Videos - in my opinion - sell the illusion of understanding without reassuring that insights were provided. You watch them, agree, and forget about them quicker than it took to watch them. I don't think that such a passive way of study can ultimately lead to insights you would alternatively gain by working through a subject with a lot of paper and ink. You already lost a lot of time by commenting here. If you were really interested, you would use every spare minute to learn more about a subject. The way from school to relativity theory and quantum mechanics is a long, winding one. The necessary mathematics alone is complicated and all but trivial. Curiosity should be your major stimulus. And then, it is relatively irrelevant what your resources are as long as they are from a university, a lecture note, or a good textbook.

I agree that the internet can be dangerous but I think it can also be valuable. I learnt a lot from Cohl Furey's set of short videos on the octonions and their use in studying the structure of the standard model, I also learnt a lot about spinors from Eigenchris's set of video lectures on spinors. Another series of short videos which I found fascinating were the Catster's series of 10 minute videos on various aspects of category theory. I found all of these video lectures on youtube. On the other hand there are plenty of books I wished I hadn't wasted time on. The moral of this story that one has to be discerning. And its easier when the discerning has already been done by a curator. At university this is done by a recommended reading list. Certainly were I teaching a university course those lectures I alluded to above would be on the recommended viewing list.

 

[fresh_42]

I learnt a lot from Cohl Furey's set of short videos on the octonions and their use in studying the structure of the standard model, I also learnt a lot about spinors from Eigenchris's set of video lectures on spinors. Another series of short videos which I found fascinating ...

This is likely a matter of personal taste and might not be generally applicable. It might also depend on whether videos are used exclusively or additionally. My major concern is the passivity they bring with them. I think science cannot be learned by consumption, and that it has to be actively worked out. You have to make mistakes and follow wrong paths in order to see possible traps, and there are no mistakes and wrong paths in videos. However, I admit that this is a personal opinion based on the fact that I have to write down something if I want to memorize it reliably, and you may have a different experience and opinion.