Topics in Young & Friedman's University Physics

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
1 reply · 3K views
bigmike94
Messages
99
Reaction score
61
I am working through the wonderful book called University physics by Young & Freedman, it’s seems like a thorough introductory textbook. My question is, instead of waiting till the end of the book to branch out into more advanced textbook that focus on mostly one topic for example classical mechanics, electromagnetism, quantum mechanics etc.

Would the book give me a good enough background to explore each topic in depth once I finish that chapter, given that I match the maths prerequisites. For example. Once I finish introductory mechanics and Newton’s laws Instead of moving on to the next chapter id like to start Taylor’s classical mechanics, another example would be once I finish the chapters on electromagnetism, could I pick up and get through Griffith’s electrodynamics. Same with the chapters on quantum mechanics in the university physics textbook. Would this be enough to give me the physics prerequisites for Griffiths intro to quantum mechanics.

I ask this because I would rather stick to one topic at a time and really hit it hard before moving on. I don’t want to forget a lot of the stuff I’ve learned that would have been a required prerequisite for the more advanced textbooks.

Please remember I am talking about physics prerequisites here not maths, I have always kept my maths way ahead of physics to make certain it can’t get in the way.

I would appreciate any response especially for those who have read the textbooks.

thank you!
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you could do it. I would do them in the following order: mechanics, e&m, quantum. I would suggest looking at the classical wave equation after Young:mechanics and special relativity after Young:e&m.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71, PhDeezNutz and bigmike94