Is it possible to learn Physics Maths without suffering?

Click For Summary
Understanding physics papers can be daunting, especially for those returning to mathematics after a long break. The discussion emphasizes the importance of grasping mathematical concepts as a language, with a focus on understanding what formulas represent in practical terms. To effectively engage with physics, foundational knowledge in calculus, including integrals, is crucial. A timeline of 5-6 months is suggested for mastering basic physics principles like kinematics and electromagnetism, contingent on the individual's effort. It is noted that simply learning math isn't sufficient; a solid understanding of physics concepts is also necessary. MIT calculus lectures are recommended as a starting point for those looking to build their mathematical skills and confidence in reading complex physics research papers.
ThunderLight
Messages
27
Reaction score
2
I'm reading Physics papers, and every time I open a paper, all I see is maths and symbols I never seen before and it's just all too overwhelming! For someone who's been away from maths for a long time due to different careers, how would they ever come to understand this maths?

It seems so natural and flows like a language by itself.
Where should this person start if they need to start understanding and working with maths like a spoken language?

Most difficulty is in imagining what the formulas are trying to say in the first place. Like, what is a partial derivative in english language? what are you doing exactly? Things like that..

What's the best way (not in many years hopefully) to start speaking and understanding the language of Physics Mathematics in a few months?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't think that you can do that.For principles of physics, likes kinematics,,Newtonian Laws,Rotation,Electromagnetisim (first year of physics).You need at least minimum calculus up to integrals.And you can learn all of them in 5-6 months maybe more, depends on the effort (In uni all this took 7 months ) .Just math is not enough to understand the main idea of the concept you have to also understand "physics" stuff.If you want to learn more stuff you need to study more calculus some other math tools, which can take year or more to understand it.Which physics papers are more about complex stuff so you need to learn a lot
( I assume physics papers mean articles)
If you want to really learn and undertand then I think these things are necessery.

MIT calculus lectures I think great If you want to start from somewhere
 
  • Like
Likes ThunderLight and fresh_42
Arman777 said:
I don't think that you can do that.For principles of physics, likes kinematics,,Newtonian Laws,Rotation,Electromagnetisim (first year of physics).You need at least minimum calculus up to integrals.And you can learn all of them in 5-6 months maybe more, depends on the effort (In uni all this took 7 months ) .Just math is not enough to understand the main idea of the concept you have to also understand "physics" stuff.If you want to learn more stuff you need to study more calculus some other math tools, which can take year or more to understand it.Which physics papers are more about complex stuff so you need to learn a lot
( I assume physics papers mean articles)
If you want to really learn and undertand then I think these things are necessery.

MIT calculus lectures I think great If you want to start from somewhere

Thank you. Yes I'm speaking about Physics research papers. 70% complex mathematics and 30% english with mathematical symbols:)
I guess I will start with MIT calculus and hope things go smoothly.

Appreciate your advice.
 
TL;DR: Jackson or Zangwill for Electrodynamics? Hi, I want to learn ultrafast optics and I am interested in condensed matter physics, ie using ultrafast optics in condensed matter systems. However, before I get onto ultrafast optics I need to improve my electrodynamics knowledge. Should I study Jackson or Zangwill for Electrodynamics? My level at the moment is Griffiths. Given my interest in ultrafast optics in condensed matter, I am not sure which book is better suited for me. If...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
7K
  • · Replies 71 ·
3
Replies
71
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
818
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
3K