Math Physics Resource Request: Mary L Boas Book

[Slimy0233]

I have been reading Mathematical Physics from Marl L. Boas' `Mathematical Methods in the Physics Sciences` and it's ok. But, I feel like for someone who hasn't been exposed to topics like Fourier Series, I need greater context. I feel like I should have chosen a different book, but that's beating a dead horse now. Is there any course available online which uses Mary L. Boas' book as it's coursebook? If not I would be satisfied with any deep discussion of the book online too.

I apologize if this request seems to be asking too much!

I have posted this in multiple forums/subreddits as I feel like the odds of getting a suitable course online is slim. Thank you for your help!
MathForums r/askmath r/mathhelp r/askphysics

 

[vanhees71]

Why do you need an online course? Just study the book!

 

[MidgetDwarf]

probably the easiest books to learn about about Fourier series are the books by tolstov, or Churchill.

tolstov books gets a bit purer the more you proceed, but gentle compared to other textbooks.

 

[vanhees71]

My favorite for Fourier analysis (for physicists) is

M. Lighthill, Introduction to Fourier analysis and generalised
functions, Cambridge University Press (1958).

 

[Slimy0233]

Why do you need an online course? Just study the book!

I feel like I need more context. I mean, maybe If someone explain stuff to me, I won't take much time to understand it

 

[vanhees71]

The only way to understand things is to work it out yourself. Of course, it's also very helpful to have people to discuss with about the subject you are learning. To some extent maybe this forum can help in this respect, but from passively watching some online movie you won't gain real understanding.

 

[Slimy0233]

The only way to understand things is to work it out yourself. Of course, it's also very helpful to have people to discuss with about the subject you are learning. To some extent maybe this forum can help in this respect, but from passively watching some online movie you won't gain real understanding.

Thank you! But I kinda disagree, watching some online lectures do help!

 

[malawi_glenn]

passively watching some online movie you won't gain real understanding

Lectures and animations etc can be a good supplement for reading a book.
Why do we have lectures at all at universities?

 

[vanhees71]

Lectures are a different form of presentation than reading a book. So are movies (e.g., of lectures ;-)) in the internet. It's good to have access to different forms of presentation to learn a subject. One should, however, be aware that particularly in the natural sciences and mathematics just passively watching a lecture/movie or even only reading a book won't help you to master any subject. You have to get active by working out the contents of the book/lecture/movie yourself and also doing a lot of problems, first trying not to look at the solutions, to see, what one has really understood. The final level of understanding is gained when teaching the subject yourself to others.

 

[Slimy0233]

I really appreciate your answer. Like, I actually wanted this. I don't know how to properly learn physics or math. I mean, I can learn alright, but not sure if it's the most efficient way. I have no strategy. I have been wanting guidance such as what you gave me now. I have been craving for it actually. I searched this forum for advice, but although I am certain it's filled with advice, my keywords didn't yield me the results I wanted. Again, I said all this, just to thank you!

But yes, although watching presentations and reading books alone can't help you as you currently pointed out, I have found that arriving at a concept from different vantage points helps understanding a ton and helps you understand more concretely, which is why I asked for resources. But yes, I completely agree with you that without working out the contents and solving the book, you won't be able to master it.

 

[Zexuo]

I've found different presentations of the same material helpful on occasion. For instance, I recall feeling like Boas's PDE chapter skipped an important detail early on, so I worked through the PDE chapter in Boyce/DiPrima first. I then picked up where I left off with Boas without my earlier unease.

Overall, I would recommend Boas for learning the math required for studying upper division physics, but I would not expect any book to present every topic to the satisfaction of every reader.