Classical Need a Supplement for Understanding Classical Mechanics?

AI Thread Summary
To effectively relearn classical mechanics, a strong understanding of the underlying principles rather than rote memorization of formulas is emphasized. Recommended supplementary texts include "Classical Mechanics" by David Morin, "Classical Mechanics 3rd Edition" by Goldstein, and "Classical Dynamics of Particles and Systems" by Marion and Thornton. The discussion also highlights the inadequacies in current educational materials regarding the Tacoma Narrows bridge collapse, suggesting that many physics textbooks fail to provide comprehensive explanations due to students' limited knowledge of differential equations. Additionally, the significance of the equation e=mc^2 is discussed, emphasizing its conceptual importance in understanding energy and mass relationships. Overall, the conversation stresses the need for a deeper grasp of classical mechanics principles through well-rounded educational resources.
Avatrin
Messages
242
Reaction score
6
Hi

I need to relearn classical mechanics. More specifically, I need to relearn everything in this PDF:
http://www.springer.com/cda/content/document/cda_downloaddocument/9783319195957-t1.pdf?SGWID=0-0-45-1509999-p177402416

However, since I have taken this course before, I want to be a little over prepared. My background is in mathematics. I am not good at just memorizing formulas; I prefer knowing how they are deduced. So, I want a book to supplement the one we are using to better understand the physics.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
my recommendation to learn classical mechanics :
  • Classical Mechanics - David Morin
  • Classical Mechanics 3rd Edition - Goldstein
  • Classical Dynamics of Particle and System - Jerry.B Marion, Stephen T. Thornton
 
Avatrin said:
Hi

I need to relearn classical mechanics. More specifically, I need to relearn everything in this PDF:
http://www.springer.com/cda/content/document/cda_downloaddocument/9783319195957-t1.pdf?SGWID=0-0-45-1509999-p177402416

However, since I have taken this course before, I want to be a little over prepared. My background is in mathematics. I am not good at just memorizing formulas; I prefer knowing how they are deduced. So, I want a book to supplement the one we are using to better understand the physics.
"What explanation(s) a textbook gives of the collapse of the 1/3-year old Tacoma Narrows bridge in November 1940", is the best criterion. Compare the solution(s) given by your preferred primer of classical mechanics, with the explanations seen on internet, e.g. at Wikipedia.com or .fr. Too often since 1957 the american college-level physics-mechanics manuals/course-notes have given an incomplete/ shortened explanation of the failure, because of students' lack of knowledge (one or two credits) in differential equations. Since two or three decades, several textbooks fo Calculus1 (3 or 4 credits) contain a latter chapter on ODEs; this is better than nothing, though this chapter is generally skipped by the teacher. The first true, complete & most interesting explanation, has been presented to the public in 1959. But the current high-school-, the college- and freshman-university-levels courses still don't offer/ show it. Very stubborn is the typical American system of education who seemingly boats for teaching the quanta in modern physics to their teenagers or young adults who don't learn the true & fundamental notions of mechanics of waves of big suspended bridges. ____________________________________________ And concerning the equation e = mc^2 . It is a symbolic notational presentation of an abbridged sentence in physics. It is a formula of capital importance, although not a mathematical-physical equation. It truly means: "An increase of energy corresponds to ( or could be translated into, or could be obtained/manufactured by) an increase of the arithmetic product of the mass of matter by its respective speed raised at the power of two." As a result, the further addition of some related parameters (for instance belonging to astro-physics) appears less heretical. Thence your senses of logic & mathematics aren't hurted any more; in advanced physics, there is no place for fiction science.
 
Last edited:
Avatrin said:
Hi

I need to relearn classical mechanics. More specifically, I need to relearn everything in this PDF:
http://www.springer.com/cda/content/document/cda_downloaddocument/9783319195957-t1.pdf?SGWID=0-0-45-1509999-p177402416

However, since I have taken this course before, I want to be a little over prepared. My background is in mathematics. I am not good at just memorizing formulas; I prefer knowing how they are deduced. So, I want a book to supplement the one we are using to better understand the physics.
1) "Physics for Scientists and Engineers, 8/e" by Raymond Serway + 1. A chapter on static equilibrium and elasticity; a last chapter on universal gravitation Nothing on general relativity. 2) "Schaum's Outiline of Engineering Mechanics: Statics", by W. McLean +3. (Wait for next edition which will give access on internet.)
 
The book is fascinating. If your education includes a typical math degree curriculum, with Lebesgue integration, functional analysis, etc, it teaches QFT with only a passing acquaintance of ordinary QM you would get at HS. However, I would read Lenny Susskind's book on QM first. Purchased a copy straight away, but it will not arrive until the end of December; however, Scribd has a PDF I am now studying. The first part introduces distribution theory (and other related concepts), which...
I've gone through the Standard turbulence textbooks such as Pope's Turbulent Flows and Wilcox' Turbulent modelling for CFD which mostly Covers RANS and the closure models. I want to jump more into DNS but most of the work i've been able to come across is too "practical" and not much explanation of the theory behind it. I wonder if there is a book that takes a theoretical approach to Turbulence starting from the full Navier Stokes Equations and developing from there, instead of jumping from...

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
6K
Replies
11
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
18
Views
7K
Replies
8
Views
11K
Back
Top