Kleppner then Morin or quick intro then Morin?

[Thinker301]

I have choice between using Kleppner then doing Morin right after or using some quick intro to mechanics then Morin, what do you guys think?

Thank you for your input :)

With my heart on my sleeve,
The Thinker

 

[verty]

You can read chapter 6 of Morin here, this suggests it covers more than K&K which I believe has nothing on Lagrangians. For what it covers, K&K is excellent. Morin covers more though.

I've seen it said here that Morin's book has very difficult questions. So those are the factors to consider: which has the style you like, which covers what you need and which suits your style of learning as regards problems.

 

[Thinker301]

So Kleppner and Morin are meant for the same audience?

 

[verty]

So Kleppner and Morin are meant for the same audience?

Well, both are meant for first year students at MIT or Harvard who have learned multivariable calculus in school already, and have probably learned algebra-based physics as well. They are ready for a principled and sophisticated exposition. Both are the most advanced books used in those institutions for first-year mechanics, I believe. Both are written for very advanced entry students. Therefore, it seems to me that they must overlap very much.

It's your decision but I can say that K&K is an excellent book, you can't go wrong with it. Only the extra scope could win me over, knowing what I know about K&K, how good it is.

But that said, Morin might be the best book for that extra content. Many people recommend Taylor as an intermediate book, but with Morin you could skip it perhaps.

 

[WannabeNewton]

Morin is a problem book. Kleppner is a textbook. It's not an either or. The Harvard honors mechanics class that uses Morin has Morin teaching the class on top of assigning problems from his text so the situation is quite different from that of self-studying.