Review: G. Polya's 'How To Solve It' - Engineer's Perspective

  • Thread starter Thread starter Malenfant
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
Engineers express mixed feelings about the book in question, with some finding it unengaging and difficult to delve into. One user mentions purchasing it to aid in their Physics studies but has yet to read it, suggesting it may not be very effective. The conversational style of the book is criticized for being boring, hindering readers from accessing its intended wisdom. There is a consensus that problem-solving skills are typically developed through extensive study and collaboration rather than through a textbook, indicating that the book's approach to teaching problem-solving may be too vague and not practical for engineering students. Overall, the discussion highlights skepticism about the book's usefulness in enhancing critical thinking and problem-solving abilities in engineering contexts.
Malenfant
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
What does everyone specifically engineers think of this book? I recently bought a used copy and after browsing it I really don't know if its useful or not.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I've tried a number of times to get into it. Unfortunately, it just bores me senseless after only a few pages, and I haven't managed to get into the real wisdom it is supposed to contain. I honestly just don't like the "conversational" style of the book.

- Warren
 
^you are not the only one.
 
I bought it, hoping it would help me with my Physics degree, although its still on the summer reading "to do" pile, so from what I gather its not too great?
 
That book has appeared in a few premium bookstores - Try looking in Borders Books & Music shops.

Having never read it, I should not say this: but designing a textbook on how to solve problems seems to be too vague as a task or set of tasks for which to write a book. You learn to solve problems through at least a few years of study and subject matter design; including at times collaboration with other problem solvers and problem posers. I believe that fundamental mechanics physics forces some people to become problem solvers. We just learn to think more critically, but specifically what else is happening in our development may not be so clear...
 
The book is fascinating. If your education includes a typical math degree curriculum, with Lebesgue integration, functional analysis, etc, it teaches QFT with only a passing acquaintance of ordinary QM you would get at HS. However, I would read Lenny Susskind's book on QM first. Purchased a copy straight away, but it will not arrive until the end of December; however, Scribd has a PDF I am now studying. The first part introduces distribution theory (and other related concepts), which...
I've gone through the Standard turbulence textbooks such as Pope's Turbulent Flows and Wilcox' Turbulent modelling for CFD which mostly Covers RANS and the closure models. I want to jump more into DNS but most of the work i've been able to come across is too "practical" and not much explanation of the theory behind it. I wonder if there is a book that takes a theoretical approach to Turbulence starting from the full Navier Stokes Equations and developing from there, instead of jumping from...

Similar threads

Back
Top