Physics textbook recommendation for young gifted child

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around recommendations for physics textbooks suitable for a young gifted child who has completed calculus but has not yet taken a formal physics class. Participants explore various educational resources, approaches to learning physics, and the importance of practical experimentation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants recommend "Thinking Physics" followed by "Conceptual Physics" by Hewitt, and then a more advanced calculus-based book like Krane or Young & Freedman (YF).
  • Others suggest that an easier calculus-based book like Knight might be more appropriate, depending on the child's reading comprehension level.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of practical experiments and observations, advocating for a hands-on approach to learning physics.
  • Another participant shares their experience that gifted students often struggle with the scientific method and the application of concepts, highlighting the need for practical engagement.
  • There is a mention of the child's age (8 years old) and their current interest in rocketry, raising questions about the appropriateness of certain textbooks for their level.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the child's existence and whether they are genuinely gifted, reflecting on the challenges of assessing educational needs without direct knowledge of the child.
  • One participant suggests trying a "Physics First" textbook, specifically mentioning a book by Tom Hsu as potentially interesting.
  • There are discussions about the relationship between physics and mathematics, with some participants noting that many gifted students view physics as merely applied math.
  • One participant raises a question about the biological aspects of physics, suggesting that understanding the physical effort involved in carrying objects may require knowledge of biology.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a variety of recommendations and approaches, indicating that there is no consensus on the best resources or methods for teaching physics to the child. Multiple competing views remain regarding the appropriateness of different textbooks and the importance of practical experimentation.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions about the child's capabilities and interests, as well as the lack of clarity on their reading comprehension level. The discussion also reflects varying opinions on the necessity of integrating practical experiments with theoretical learning.

  • #31
Thanks to both Mark and Vela, but I'm not trying to hijack this thread about books.
I was probably wrong to branch by commenting on someone's response to GMax's obiter dictum remark about work.
I think his point was not that he (or I) wanted an explanation of why work is <what you said in nice Latex>, rather that this is the sort of question that arises for curious people, and "tie physics to observations" might be a useful thing to do. I just wanted to support his view, because I'm such a person for whom squiggles on paper mean little unless I can relate them to practical experiences.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: gmax137 and symbolipoint
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
PeroK said:
In other words, none of us knows whether this child even exists.
So I think our best advice should be:

"Have the child read this PF thread, and then do an Amazon search with "Look Inside" to find books that they like. If they are bright enough that's the best strategy for multiple reasons. :smile:
 
  • #33
Muu9 said:
They've gone through calculus (Essential Calculus by Stewart) but haven't had a formal physics class yet (but a lot of pop-physics reading). I recommended Thinking Physics followed by Conceptual Physics by Hewitt, followed by a meaty calc-based book like Krane or YF, but I wonder if an easy calculus-based book like Knight would be more appropriate instead of conceptual physics. What do you think?
Personally, I find young and freedman a great textbook for beginners to calculus, whereas if you have a strong foundation in calculus you can try morin; there are 2 books published by David Morin I believe, the easier one is referred to as 'baby morin' usually, which mainly covers classical mechanics, whereas the more advanced one goes into deeper topics is often referred to as 'daddy morin', either one is great for people who want to do more practice questions on physics, but disclaimer: they are not meant as textbooks, but rather almost pure practices booklets with detailed explained solutions, so I would recommend using it with a textbook like young and freedman for reference.

Additionally, there are lots of awesome physics courses available online, and the ones I would recommend are those on the MIT opencourseware website, such as courses 8.01 (Classical mechanics), 8.02 (Electricity and magnetism), and 8.03 (Vibrations and waves), and if you want, 18.01 for single variable calculus to a relatively deep level. Hopefully this is of help :)

MITOCW website: https://ocw.mit.edu/
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
12K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K