Mathematical Methods for Physics and Engineering

In summary, this book is aimed at physicists and engineers, and it focuses more on the utility of the methods and their application in physics than on building the theory in a postulate-theorem-proof structure. However, aspiring mathematicians can still benefit from the book as it introduces the use of abstract mathematical concepts in familiar physical situations.
  • #1
Thinkaholic
19
6
I’m thinking about getting this monster of a book because I heard it was incredibly awesome and useful, but I have one question. I want to be both a physicist and a mathematician in the future, so can aspiring pure mathematicians learn many useful things from this book, or does this book only focus on applications of the topics covered? Does the book go into excessive detail (and I say that as a good thing) about each topic?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
First of all: Always mention not only the book title, but also the author(s). If you do not there may generally be degeneracies such as in this case, where my book has the same title as the book by Riley, Hobson, and Bence. (The title is one of the things you have the least control over as an author and, according to my publisher, similar and even the same title may not be as uncommon as you might think.)

That being said, this type of books (along the lines "mathematical methods (for/in/of) (physics/physicists) (and engineers/engineering)", i.e., RHB, my book, Arfken, Boas, etc) will generally be aimed at physicists and engineers, not budding mathematicians. As such, they typically focus more on the utility of the methods and their application in physics rather than on building the theory in a postulate-theorem-proof structure. Personally, my focus was on building the formalism needed and introducing its use in familiar physical situations in order to build intuition before applying it in more advanced settings.

Of course, this does not mean that this type of books does not have "excessive detail", it is just a question of what you mean by excessive detail. You might mean a book that has a very stringent formalism or you might mean a book that builds a detailed intuition for how the tools are used. The type of books we discuss here typically does the latter.
 
  • Like
Likes Nguyen Son, dextercioby, Demystifier and 1 other person
  • #3
Well, when I studied physics, in some semesters, I listened more to mathematics than physics lectures (which was possible in the "good old times", where you could do at the university whatever you wanted without control over attendance etc. Of course, you had to pass your exams, but nobody cared how you got the knowledge to do so). There I was always a bit amused that the mathematicians could prove very complicated theorems in a very rigorous way, but were not able to do a simple basis transformation in linear algebra or evaluate a not-too-complicated integral. So I think also as a pure mathematician you can benefit a lot from books explaining how math is applied in the natural sciences and engineering. You do not only get a better education in "cranking out the numbers" but also some intuitive ideas about abstract mathematical concepts. E.g., knowing what surface integrals and the usual differential operators in vector calculus have to do with fluid mechanics gives you a great intuition about abstract ideas like de Rham cohomology and Stokes's theorem.

The same holds true also in the other way: It doesn't harm a theoretical physicist at all to have some idea about rigorous pure mathematics, because treating a distribution (in the sense of generalized function) as a function without thinking enough about it, can lead to big trouble and misunderstandings. So it's always good to have a broad overview over ones subject!

I'm often very thankful about the pretty abstract lectures by pure mathematicins I heard during my studies of physics. Although I've forgotten a lot already, because things you do not need regularly, you tend to forget unfortunately, I've an idea what might be going on when I encounter a problem in some applied use of mathematics.
 
  • #4
vanhees71 said:
There I was always a bit amused that the mathematicians could prove very complicated theorems in a very rigorous way, but were not able to do a simple basis transformation in linear algebra or evaluate a not-too-complicated integral.
I guess electric engineers are similarly amused how can theoretical physicists write the general solution of Maxwell equation in 10 dimensions, but cannot answer some basic practical questions about a dipole antenna.
 
  • #5
True. The main difference, however, between engineers and physicists is that the former use the Laplace and the latter the Fourier transformation ;-).
 
  • Like
Likes Demystifier
  • #6
vanhees71 said:
True. The main difference, however, between engineers and physicists is that the former use the Laplace and the latter the Fourier transformation ;-).
Engineers use plenty of FFTs these days. :woot:
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
  • #7
It depends on what you want to calculate. For initial-value problems often the Laplace transformation is more convenient than the Fourier transformation.
 
  • #8
The question is, are there non-applied physicists who use the Laplace transform? :wideeyed:
 
  • #9
Did somebody say Wick rotation?

I think this is drifting off-topic ... :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Likes Demystifier and vanhees71

1. What is the purpose of studying mathematical methods for physics and engineering?

The purpose of studying mathematical methods for physics and engineering is to understand and apply mathematical concepts and techniques to solve problems in these fields. These methods provide a powerful tool for analyzing and modeling physical systems and phenomena, and are essential for advancements in technology and scientific research.

2. What are some common mathematical methods used in physics and engineering?

Some common mathematical methods used in physics and engineering include calculus, linear algebra, differential equations, complex analysis, and numerical analysis. These methods are used to describe and analyze physical systems, as well as to develop models and make predictions about their behavior.

3. How do mathematical methods help in understanding complex physical phenomena?

Mathematical methods provide a systematic and rigorous approach to understanding complex physical phenomena. They help to identify relationships and patterns in data, make predictions, and determine the underlying principles and laws governing these phenomena. By using mathematical models, scientists and engineers can better understand and manipulate these systems.

4. Are there any specific applications of mathematical methods in physics and engineering?

Yes, there are many specific applications of mathematical methods in physics and engineering. For example, calculus is used to study rates of change and motion, while differential equations are used to describe systems that change over time. Linear algebra is used for analyzing and solving systems of equations, and complex analysis is used to study wave phenomena and electrical circuits.

5. How can I improve my understanding and proficiency in mathematical methods for physics and engineering?

To improve your understanding and proficiency in mathematical methods for physics and engineering, it is important to practice solving problems and applying these methods to real-world situations. You can also seek guidance from teachers, tutors, or online resources, and stay updated on new developments and applications of these methods in your field of interest.

Similar threads

  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
2
Views
144
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
28
Views
1K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
18
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top