Engineering Undergraduate textbooks and lectures

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around the challenges faced by a first-year engineering student in understanding undergraduate textbooks, which are perceived as convoluted and intimidating. The student expresses a preference for visual learning through videos but struggles with the complex language and symbols in textbooks. Responses emphasize the importance of developing a serious study approach rather than relying solely on video content. It is suggested that the student should seek textbooks that align better with their learning style and focus on mastering the mathematical language of the subject. Active engagement, such as solving problems, collaborating with peers, and seeking help from tutors, is highlighted as essential for truly understanding the material. The conversation underscores the need for persistence and active learning strategies in overcoming academic challenges in engineering studies.
sulhar
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi, so I'm a first year undergraduate in engineering science. I guess my main question is, are all undergrad textbooks purposely convoluted to scare us from our degrees? Let me explain.
I enjoy my lectures, I feel like the notes are very useful, but whenever my tutors or lecturers refer us to undergrad textbooks for wider reading of problems I feel like I can not understand a word. Maybe I'm just a more visual learner (i.e. videos) but I feel like if they're being recommended they must be for my level. Have I not found the right books?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hello sulhar, :welcome: !

sulhar said:
main question is, are all undergrad textbooks purposely convoluted to scare us from our degrees
On the contrary

sulhar said:
Have I not found the right books?
To me it seems you haven't found the right attitude. Bingeing on youtube videos is not the same thing as undertaking a serious study of a particular subject.

Did you have the same problems with math earlier on ?
 
  • Like
Likes sulhar
BvU said:
hello sulhar, :welcome: !

On the contrary

To me it seems you haven't found the right attitude. Bingeing on youtube videos is not the same thing as undertaking a serious study of a particular subject.

Did you have the same problems with math earlier on ?
Hi,
You're probably right. I'm just used to taking a more intuitive approach before jumping into the numbers (to be fair I've always managed to understand the actual computations better after having done this first). From the books I've tried to consult I just can't seem to digest the information the author is trying to put across because I get caught up in the complicated symbols and the maths becomes less intuitive to me.

I guess I'm asking that if I'm finding a textbook difficult to digest, does this mean I need to find something maybe slightly different (as in an author who takes a slightly different approach) or should I be able to figure it out?
 
At one point you have to sit down and figure it out. You haven't understood a topic, when you are not able to understand the math and finally being able to apply it to problems. The right approach is, indeed, to first try to understand a phenomenon intuitively but then to learn the adequate language of the natural and engineering sciences, which is math. It's particularly important to get as soon as possible used to an active approach, i.e., to solve problems yourself, discuss difficulties with other students, ask your tutor/professor when you can't get a problem solved after considerable effort, etc. Just sitting in the lecture or (even worse) watching a Youtube movie often one gets the wrong impression to have "understood everything" (particularly when the lecturer is good!). You can only find out, whether you have understood something by doing problems and/or trying to explain it to other people. It's thus so important to find some fellow students with whom you can study the problems together (but also be sure to be able to solve the problems for yourself).
 
  • Like
Likes sulhar and BvU
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
2
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
39
Views
7K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
4K
Back
Top