Comprehensive List of STEM Bibles: Physics, Mechanics, Electrodynamics, etc.

[jedishrfu]

Great book, but not a bible.

Flanders will not be happy :-(

 

[Daverz]

Yvonne Choquet-Bruhat and Cecile DeWitt-Morette, Analysis, Manifolds and Physics

 

[Demystifier]

Yvonne Choquet-Bruhat and Cecile DeWitt-Morette, Analysis, Manifolds and Physics

Who said that only men write bibles?

 

[DrClaude]

What about Donald Knuth's The Art of Computer Programming? I've never read it, but heard so much about it. Maybe the CS people can chime in.

 

[George Jones]

I read the first chapter and looked at it at Barnes Noble. It was behind the counter at the local BN.

It’s high quality printing at its best. It’s a tome and not something you’d carry around a lot. The illustrations are very good.

I was considering buying it but just couldn’t decide. I felt that maybe Arfken and Weber was more approachable. I couldn’t find that one topic in the book where the book spoke to me and would cause me to buy it.

Even though there is overlap, (Thorne and Blandford) and (Arfen and Weber) are quite different books; they are not meant to do the same thing. Thorne and Blandford treats advanced Classical Physics. At times, it uses standard Mathematical Methods to do this, but the emphasis is on the physics. At other times, Thorne and Blandford uses more geometrical mathematics that isn't so standard in Mathematical Methods texts. Arfken and Weber has some application to physics, but emphasizes the methods.

Likes and dislikes are very personal and subjective. I am only lukewarm with respect to Arfken and Weber, but many folks really like it (including my wife!).

Most people probably want/need the mathematical techniques in Arfken and Weber more than they want/need Thorne and Blandford's treatment of advanced classical physics. A couple of months ago, my wife came to my office, saw Blandford and Thorne, read the title and subtitle, and exclaimed "What is THIS doing on your shelf!" She never would have predicted that I would buy such a book.

Maybe in a decade or so the Mathematical Methods book by @Orodruin will be a Bible!

 

[jedishrfu]

Even though there is overlap, (Thorne and Blandford) and (Arfen and Weber) are quite different books; they are not meant to do the same thing. Thorne and Blandford treats advanced Classical Physics. At times, it uses standard Mathematical Methods to do this, but the emphasis is on the physics. At other times, Thorne and Blandford uses more geometrical mathematics that isn't so standard in Mathematical Methods texts. Arfken and Weber has some application to physics, but emphasizes the methods.

Likes and dislikes are very personal and subjective. I am only lukewarm with respect to Arfken and Weber, but many folks really like it (including my wife!).

Most people probably want/need the mathematical techniques in Arfken and Weber more than they want/need Thorne and Blandford's treatment of advanced classical physics. A couple of months ago, my wife came to my office, saw Blandford and Thorne, read the title and subtitle, and exclaimed "What is THIS doing on your shelf!" She never would have predicted that I would buy such a book.

You nailed it pretty well, I'm more interested in the math right now as that's needed to understand the physics I want to relearn. Arfken chapters are more discrete in that you can skip around and I felt that Thorne's book was more sequential building up a base one chapter topic at a time. Perhaps, when I retire I'll get a copy with my final paycheck.

 

[Demystifier]

What about Donald Knuth's The Art of Computer Programming? I've never read it, but heard so much about it. Maybe the CS people can chime in.

I've already mentioned it in #25.

 

[DrClaude]

I've already mentioned it in #25.

Missed that one

 

[Daverz]

I.S. Gradshteyn and I.M. Ryzhik, Table of Integrals, Series and Products

W. Richard Stevens, Advanced Programming in the UNIX Environment

 

[Dr Transport]

I.S. Gradshteyn and I.M. Ryzhik, Table of Integrals, Series and Products

post 32...

 

[Zarlucicil]

Press, Teukolsky, Vetterling, Flannery - Numerical Recipes, 3rd ed
More on the applied side, but I'd say a bible, nonetheless. There are tons of versions out there depending on what language was in vogue, but I'd say the current 3rd ed is pretty bible-y.

Horowitz, Hill - The Art of Electronics
Second and third editions are definitely bibles. Haven't encountered a first edition.

I'd also add Courant & Hilbert - Methods of Mathematical Physics (2 vols) as bibles and second Dr. Transport's suggestion in #30 to include Morse & Feshbach.

As for computer science, I'd add CLRS - Introduction to Algorithms, 3rd ed.

 

[Scrumhalf]

Joseph Goodman - Introduction to Fourier Optics.

 

[Dr Transport]

Joseph Goodman - Introduction to Fourier Optics.

In conjunction with Linear Systems and Fourier Optics written by Jack Gaskill, then you have a bible. Consider Gaskill as the old and Goodman the new...

 

[Scrumhalf]

Haha, I was about to post that!

 

[Dr Transport]

Haha, I was about to post that!

The story I heard from one of my professors who loved Gaskill's book was this. Jack Gaskill was Joe Goodman's student at Stanford (I think), anyway, Jack flunked Joes' course at least once if not twice and swore that when he was a professor, he'd write a text with everything necessary to know so a student could read Joes' book and be able to work thru it.

 

[Hypercube]

Why not make this thread "sticky"? I spent a fare amount of searching and googling before I discovered Jackson and Sakurai, which are already listed on the first page here. Other students may not need to.

 

[Demystifier]

Consider Gaskill as the old and Goodman the new...

Jack Gaskill was Joe Goodman's student .

Are you saying that the new testament is written before the old testament?

 

[Dr Transport]

Are you saying that the new testament is written before the old testament?

In this case yes...I know bass ackwards, but stranger things have happened in STEM...

 

[TeethWhitener]

This list has been Physics heavy. How about some Electrical Engineering? These are some bibles if you're interested in microelectronics.

Sze -- Physics of Semiconductor Devices
Oppenheim and Shaefer -- Discrete-Time Signal Processing
Mead and Conway -- Introduction to VLSI Systems
Gray, Meyer, Hurst, and Lewis -- Analysis and Design of Analog Integrated Circuits
Rabaey -- Digital Integrated Circuit Design
Patterson and Hennessy -- Computer Organization and Design
Hennessy and Patterson -- Computer Architecture, A Quantitative Approach

Also necessary (from the hands-on side):

Building Scientific Apparatus by Moore, Davis, and Coplan

I lug this one around everywhere.

 

[Scrumhalf]

In this case yes...I know bass ackwards, but stranger things have happened in STEM...

Here are the old and the New testament on my bookshelf at work, with a couple of other beauties in the middle!

 

[Dr Transport]

Here are the old and the New testament on my bookshelf at work, with a couple of other beauties in the middle!

View attachment 225355

I have a Born and Wolf (Wolf only), Gaskill and Goodman autographed set, I won't take them to the office for fear they'll disappear.

 

[analogdesign]

Also necessary (from the hands-on side):

Building Scientific Apparatus by Moore, Davis, and Coplan

I lug this one around everywhere.

Wow, great book! I just got it at the campus library this morning. I can't believe I'd never heard of it.

 

[TeethWhitener]

Wow, great book! I just got it at the campus library this morning. I can't believe I'd never heard of it.

Gotta love a book that references McMaster Carr on the first page.

 

[Andy Resnick]

Also necessary (from the hands-on side):

Building Scientific Apparatus by Moore, Davis, and Coplan

I lug this one around everywhere.

Another good one is Hobbs "Building Electro-Optic Systems; Making it all Work". Phil was a regular contributor to sci.optics back in the day...

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

Sedra and Smith is good for a student, but it is way too basic to be considered a "bible" of circuit design. I haven't cracked my copy in probably 15 years.

The OP defined bible in this case as "more-or-less everything one need to know about the subject." Sedra and Smith does not reach that level.

The other books, however, do. If you read Analysis and Design of Analog Integrated Circuits, for instance, you could successfully design an analog integrated circuit.

So more than 1600 pages of analog and digital circuits in Sedra and Smith doesn't cut it?!

WTF?!

 

[FourEyedRaven]

Mathematics Bibles
(I know a couple have been mentioned before. I repeat just to put them into context.)

Handbooks:
"Handbook of Mathematics", Bronshtein and Semendyayev
"Mathematical Handbook for Scientists and Engineers", Granino Korn and Theresa Korn
"Handbook of Mathematics for Engineers and Scientists", Polyanin and Manzhirov
"CRC Standard Mathematical Tables and Formulae", Daniel Zwillinger
"Handbook of Mathematics", Thierry Vialar

Mathematical Logic:
"Fundamentals of Mathematical Logic", Peter Hinman

Model Theory:
"Model Theory", Wilfrid Hodges

Set Theory:
"Set Theory", Thomas Jech

Abstract Algebra:
"Basic Algebra", vols I and II. Nathan Jacobson

Category Theory:
"Handbook of Categorical Algebra", vols 1, 2 and 3. Francis Borceux

Calculus:
"Calculus", vols 1 and 2. Tom Apostol

Classical Differential Geometry (in 3D):
"Differential Geometry of Curves and Surfaces", Manfredo do Carmo

Differential Geometry (on manifolds):
"A Comprehensive Introduction to Differential Geometry", vols 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. Michael Spivak

General Topology:
"Topology", Munkres

Algebraic Topology:
"Algebraic Topology", Allen Hatcher

Algebraic Geometry (with schemes):
"Algebraic Geometry", Robin Hartshorne

And if you have a screw loose, read Grothendieck's EGA.

 

[Auto-Didact]

And if you have a screw loose, read Grothendieck's EGA.

Back on topic. I'm wondering, can Roger Penrose's 'The Road To Reality' (2001) be considered as a Bible? Apart from its 1100 page format, it is definitely the "broadest" single book I have ever read on physics, spanning and unifying perspectives and ideas in mathematics and physics from the point of view of a mathematical physicist. The only other book I can even think of coming anywhere close is 'The Foundation of Science' (1912) by Henri Poincaré, which by contemporary standards is woefully outdated for physics per se and nowhere near as explicitly mathematical, but extremely useful as a historical and philosophy of science text.

For those not in the know, The Road to Reality literally starts off from elementary mathematics, building its way up to graduate level mathematics in the course of 400 pages. Penrose then introduces classical physics and modern physics in the next 400 pages using the mathematics from the earlier chapters. The remaining pages are devoted to a few important topics in mathematical and theoretical physics, which again build on the earlier mathematical basis. During the entire book he leaves many exercises for the reader to complete, ranging from simple to arcane.

Both the depth and comprehensiveness are considerable, though the book obviously does not contain literally everything one needs to know in a single particular subject which it treats (it would need to be way over 10000 pages in order to do that). On the contrary, I would say that it illuminates both mathematical intuition and directly applicable and procedural physics knowledge along with their interconnections to other fields in mathematics and physics; these are all separate things one expects that a good physicist should know.

It is also somewhat difficult to judge the book in this day and age, seeing practically all physicists today are specialists, while the book very much has the approach of a generalist; this also explains why we don't see any books like this summarizing all of physics anymore, certainly not written by one person and certainly not including as much mathematics as is done here. A few of my old physics professors actually said large sections of the mathematical chapters are beyond them, while the physics sections are mostly good, yet not always treated in depth enough for them or necessarily aligned with their own perspectives on matters.

I believe Penrose has mainly written the book for multiple audiences, namely:
1) (physics) students, in order to lure them into mathematical and/or theoretical physics.
2) practicing physicists who have already chosen a career path outside theoretical physics, but remain interested in it.
3) mathematicians wanting to learn more physics.
4) physicists, who went on to become philosophers of physics/science, who need a quick introduction or refresher into any of these topics for their work.
5) interested 'layman', i.e. (retired) engineers and scientists from other fields who are unafraid of mathematics.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

Mathematics Bibles
(I know a couple have been mentioned before. I repeat just to put them into context.)

Handbooks:
"Handbook of Mathematics", Bronshtein and Semendyayev
"Mathematical Handbook for Scientists and Engineers", Granino Korn and Theresa Korn
"Handbook of Mathematics for Engineers and Scientists", Polyanin and Manzhirov
"CRC Standard Mathematical Tables and Formulae", Daniel Zwillinger
"Handbook of Mathematics", Thierry Vialar

Mathematical Logic:
"Fundamentals of Mathematical Logic", Peter Hinman

Model Theory:
"Model Theory", Wilfrid Hodges

Set Theory:
"Set Theory", Thomas Jech

Abstract Algebra:
"Basic Algebra", vols I and II. Nathan Jacobson

Category Theory:
"Handbook of Categorical Algebra", vols 1, 2 and 3. Francis Borceux

Calculus:
"Calculus", vols 1 and 2. Tom Apostol

Classical Differential Geometry (in 3D):
"Differential Geometry of Curves and Surfaces", Manfredo do Carmo

Differential Geometry (on manifolds):
"A Comprehensive Introduction to Differential Geometry", vols 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. Michael Spivak

General Topology:
"Topology", Munkres

Algebraic Topology:
"Algebraic Topology", Allen Hatcher

Algebraic Geometry (with schemes):
"Algebraic Geometry", Robin Hartshorne

And if you have a screw loose, read Grothendieck's EGA.

I read somewhere that EGA has in it solutions to the exercises from Heartshorne, so if you aren't necessarily a genius and you want to understand then you are obliged to read EGA; I wonder how many mistakes are left there.

 

[FourEyedRaven]

I read somewhere that EGA has in it solutions to the exercises from Heartshorne, so if you aren't necessarily a genius and you want to understand then you are obliged to read EGA; I wonder how many mistakes are left there.

I guess... it seems like a recipee for insanity, though. If nothing else, for the amount of typos in those volumes, especially the SGA, I assume. There are intermediary texts between Hartshorne and basic algebraic geometry that can make it easier to understand. But if you want to read EGA, and the material in the SGA that was supposed to go into later volumes of EGA, then start here. I'd say they're the ultimate Algebraic Geometry Bible.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Éléments_de_géométrie_algébrique
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Séminaire_de_Géométrie_Algébrique_du_Bois_Marie

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

I guess... it seems like a recipee for insanity, though. If nothing else, for the amount of typos in those volumes, especially the SGA, I assume. There are intermediary texts between Hartshorne and basic algebraic geometry that can make it easier to understand. But if you want to read EGA, and the material in the SGA that was supposed to go into later volumes of EGA, then start here. I'd say they're the ultimate Algebraic Geometry Bible.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Éléments_de_géométrie_algébrique
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Séminaire_de_Géométrie_Algébrique_du_Bois_Marie

It really depends how deep do you want to go, down the rabbit hole.


If you want to stay sane, then you are in the wrong occupation anyways.
Take the blue pill!

 

[Demystifier]

I'm wondering, can Roger Penrose's 'The Road To Reality' (2001) be considered as a Bible?

I wouldn't say so. It is written on a semi-popular level, so as such it is not very authoritative. If you want to seriously learn some topic in physics or mathematics, that's not a book you will use.

 

[e-pie]

Did anyome forget to mention Knepper Kolenkow's An Introduction to Mechanics?

The best book bridging the gap between school and advanced college studies.

I liked the examples a lot. I even talked to Dr Knepper through email.

VI Arnold's ODE, PDE, Mathematical Methods. Very hard books. Mostly focusses on geometrical approach of ODE, PDE. A great mathematical physicist.

Tom M Apostol Calculus Volume 1,2 Mathematical Analysis. I think the best calculus book out there for mathematicians. It is very rigorous text and almost similar to analysis.

Sherbert Bartle/Royden, Rudin Real Analysis.

Lars V Ahlfors Complex Analysis.
From Wikipedia/Lars Ahlfors

"His book Complex Analysis (1953) is the classic text on the subject and is almost certainly referenced in any more recent text which makes heavy use of complex analysis"

Big names,

Richard Courant
David Hillbert
Mathematical Methods for Physicist.
Also on same topic by Arfken Weber, ML Boas.

Algebra BL Waerden

Spivak A Comprehensive Introduction to Differential Geometry Volume 1-5 Spivak.

Theory of Differential Equations Part 1-4 Volume 1-6.A very old book.

Euclid Elements Book 1-13
Einstein Theory of Relativity

Please let me know if I repeated any names already mentioned.

 

[e-pie]

Continuing

Molecular Biology of the Cell Watson
iGenetics Russell
Thermodynamics Fermi

Though I have read parts of iGenetics.

University Chemistry by Mahan
Inorganic Chemistry Volume 1,2 IL Finar

Any book by Walter Rudin

Zorich Analysis 1,2
Coddington Levinson Differential Equations
PM Cohn Groups, Rings, Fields
IN Herstein Topics in Algebra

Big Name GH Hardy Pure Mathematics, Number Theory, Inequalities

Cauchy Schwarz Masterclass (Forgot the author)

Below were too costly for me. So never had the chance to read them.

Disquisitiones Arithmeticae by Carl Friedrich Gauss
Principia Newton
The Science of Mechanics(author?) Some sources state that Einstein got the idea of GR by reading this book.
Elements of Algebra, Analysis of Infinite, differential calculus Euler.
Cours d'analyse Cauchy.

Cauchy, Euler, Gauss where the only mathematicians to know all of Mathematics at their time.

 

[e-pie]

Continuing

Polya How to Solve it

G Boole. These are classics.
The Mathematical Analysis of Logic
Treatise on Differential Equations
Calculus of Finite Differences.

 

[olddog]

I concur that Kleppner and kolenkow should be there.

Morse and Feshbach: Methods of Theoretical Physics Vols 1 and 2

One, that I haven't noticed glancing over the pages.

Quantum Mechanics Vols 1 and 2: Cohen-Tannoudji.