Is This the Ultimate Guide for Teaching Yourself Physics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter zaazeemaa
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Physics Teaching
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around resources and strategies for self-teaching physics, particularly for high school students. Participants evaluate a specific article and suggest various books and materials, while also sharing personal experiences and recommendations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the quality of a specific online guide for self-teaching physics and seeks opinions on its validity.
  • Another participant endorses Halliday and Resnick as a good resource, mentioning that while some books may be expensive, libraries could provide access.
  • A participant highlights the availability of Feynman's lectures online, noting their unique perspective on physics despite some mistakes and idiosyncrasies.
  • One contributor suggests that learning calculus is essential for understanding physics and recommends Lang's first course on calculus before tackling Halliday and Resnick.
  • A different viewpoint criticizes a specific classical mechanics book (Thornton and Marion) for its focus on equations over physical insight, suggesting that this approach detracts from understanding the subject.
  • Another participant provides a link to a different resource, emphasizing that learning physics is a challenging and time-consuming endeavor.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of opinions on the effectiveness of different resources, with some endorsing specific books while others criticize them. There is no consensus on the best approach or materials for self-teaching physics.

Contextual Notes

Some participants mention the potential challenges of learning physics, including the need for calculus and the varying quality of available resources. There is also an acknowledgment of the subjective nature of learning preferences and styles.

zaazeemaa
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I'm pretty bored (in high school) and have been interested in physics for a long time , so i searched the web on teaching my self physics and came across this article ( http://www.squidoo.com/garagephysicist ). I'm wondering if it's a good guide or a steaming pile of crap or maybe you have a better idea. Thank you in advance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
It looks fine to me. Halliday and Resnick was a book I read a long time ago, and although I haven't read the "Demystified" or "For Dummies" books carefully, I've glanced at them, and they seem at the least ok, and possibly quite good. I think the only problem is that books are expensive, so if you can get them from a library that would be better.

Recently, the classic lectures by Feynman have become freely available at http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/ or http://www.feynmanlectures.info/flp. These have a few mistakes, and I think the view on quantum mechanics might be considered a little idiosyncratic nowadays. Nonetheless these are unparalleled for showing a good way to think about physics. You will probably not understand much in these lectures the first time you read them, so dip into them a little, go and learn from a more standard textbook, then come back again, many times.
 
Last edited:
zaazeemaa said:
I'm pretty bored (in high school) and have been interested in physics for a long time , so i searched the web on teaching my self physics and came across this article ( http://www.squidoo.com/garagephysicist ). I'm wondering if it's a good guide or a steaming pile of crap or maybe you have a better idea. Thank you in advance.

I would start by learning calculus, it'll make physics much more interesting. Go through Lang's first course on calculus. After that, you should go through Halliday and Resnick.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Avoid that classical mechanics book they mentioned (Thornton and Marion), unless you prefer nasty equations and moving symbols around to having physical insight and a real understanding of the subject (make no mistake, the subject doesn't HAVE to be all about nasty equations--that is the author's fault, completely). That's my only comment. Can't comment on the rest.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
8K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
7K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
2K