Other What Are Some Notable Baby Books Across Different Fields?

[Demystifier]

When the same author(s) write two books on the same topic, with one book being more elementary and less advanced than the other, then this more elementary book is called "baby". A well known example is baby Rudin for mathematical analysis. Another example is baby Reif for statistical physics. Do you know other examples?

 

[haushofer]

Mmmm, I thought this topic would fullfill my 8 months old daughter's curiosity about general relativity.

 

[vanhees71]

No problem. There's some material for babies too:

https://www.amazon.de/s?k=Baby+University&__mk_de_DE=ÅMÅŽÕÑ&ref=nb_sb_noss_2

 

[Demystifier]

Baby Huang https://www.amazon.com/dp/0748409424/?tag=pfamazon01-20
vs adult Huang https://www.amazon.com/dp/0471417602/?tag=pfamazon01-20

 

[Demystifier]

Serge Lang, an extremely prolific writer of math textbooks, wrote baby versions for mathematical analysis, algebra and linear algebra. (He's so prolific that there is a joke that Bourbaki stopped writing books when they learned that Lang is a single person.)

 

[Mondayman]

Doesn't quite work because the first one isn't a full textbook, but because I (semi) use both, I refer to them as such:

Baby Morin:
Problems and Solutions in Introductory Mechanics

Adult Morin:
Introduction to Classical Mechanics: With Problems and Solutions

 

[Infrared]

Baby McDuff-Salamon: Introduction to Symplectic Topology
Adult McDuff-Salamon: J-Holomorphic Curves and Symplectic Topology

 

[andresB]

I wonder if there is a baby Jackson's electrodynamics somewhere.

 

[Frabjous]

Not sure if they count: Charles Kittel Solid State Physics and Quantum Theory of Solids

 

[Keith_McClary]

I wonder if there is a baby Jackson's electrodynamics somewhere.

There's ELECTRO_MAGNETISM.

https://csferrie.com/books/

 

[Demystifier]

Not sure if they count: Charles Kittel Solid State Physics and Quantum Theory of Solids

I think that's a great example.

 

[haushofer]

No problem. There's some material for babies too:

https://www.amazon.de/s?k=Baby+University&__mk_de_DE=ÅMÅŽÕÑ&ref=nb_sb_noss_2

That's the best pedagogical advice I've had in 8 months time, thanks!

 

[Amrator]

I guess An Introduction to Statistical Learning could be considered the "baby" version of The Elements of Statistical Learning.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1461471370/?tag=pfamazon01-20

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0387848576/?tag=pfamazon01-20

"Baby" Hastie.

 

[MidgetDwarf]

When the same author(s) write two books on the same topic, with one book being more elementary and less advanced than the other, then this more elementary book is called "baby". A well known example is baby Rudin for mathematical analysis. Another example is baby Reif for statistical physics. Do you know other examples?

Yes, Edwin E. Moise : Geometry. There is also Elementary Geometry From An Advance Standpoint By him. The first is an excellent book aimed at high schoolers. The "Elementary Geometry" is for a a undergrad math student.

 

[George Jones]

My example below doesn't quite work because the adult version has two authors, while the baby version only has one author.

Concepts of Elementary Particle Physics by Peskin.
An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory by Peskin and Schroeder.

 

[Keith_McClary]

Elementary Particle Physics

We need: "Elementary Elementary Particle Physics".

 

[Demystifier]

We need: "Elementary Elementary Particle Physics".

For that purpose I would suggest Tong. http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/tong/particle.html

 

[Amrator]

We need: "Elementary Elementary Particle Physics".

Martinus Veltman's Facts and Mysteries in Elementary Particle Physics is also really good.

 

[AndreasC]

Hecht wrote a baby Hecht as well as a large adult baby Hecht.

 

[Demystifier]

Hecht wrote a baby Hecht as well as a large adult baby Hecht.

Optics, yes.

 

[Falgun]

Well Herstein wrote a baby version of his 'Topics in Algebra'

 

[diogenesNY]

Linus Pauling wrote a chemistry text for undergraduates who are not majoring in chemistry entitled _College Chemistry_ (and I _really_ wish I had this book when I was in high school).

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13433096-college-chemistryHe also wrote a (sort of) companion book entitled _General Chemistry_ which is a bit more advanced and in depth. It is oriented towards undergraduates who are or are intending to major in Chemistry.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1081360.General_Chemistry

Full text:
https://archive.org/details/dli.ernet.448871

 

[Demystifier]

Well Herstein wrote a baby version of his 'Topics in Algebra'

Is it called "Abstract Algebra"?

 

[Falgun]

Yes

 

[Mr.Husky]

Bit late but,
Sadri hassani "Mathematical physics" https://www.amazon.com/dp/3319011944/?tag=pfamazon01-20
has a baby version called "Mathematical methods for students of physics and related fields" https://www.amazon.com/dp/0387095039/?tag=pfamazon01-20

 

[Mr.Husky]

Judith B. Bruckner and Andrew M. Bruckner wrote two books on real analysis.
Baby version:-
https://books.google.co.in/books/ab...ton&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=1&redir_esc=y
Papa version:-
https://books.google.co.in/books/ab...ton&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=1&redir_esc=y
Both books are (free!) Downloadable here:-
http://classicalrealanalysis.info/com/

 

[Demystifier]

Papa version:-

In this case the opposite of baby is adult, not papa.

 

[vanhees71]

Don't forget for being a good mathematician you have to stay a bit like a child!

 

[Demystifier]

Don't forget for being a good mathematician you have to stay a bit like a child!

Why? In what sense?

 

[Mr.Husky]

In this case the opposite of baby is adult, not papa.

Baby Bruckner couple.
Adult Bruckner couple

 

[vanhees71]

Why? In what sense?

It was meant as a joke. If you know enough mathematicians you know what I mean, but maybe it's even some deeper truth in it, because you have to be open to just play around with ideas and puzzles. It's precisely what's killed when thinking math were like it is presented by Bourbaki. Bourbaki presents the final state of a mathematical subject but doesn't tell you anything about how you get there. In this sense it's like a very good encyclopedia to look up mathematical facts but a lousy textbook, because it's not telling you how in fact to do math.

 

[Mr.Husky]

Mercel berger wrote a book on classical geometry and another on Riemannian geometry. Does this qualify your criteria Demystifier?
Classical:-https://books.google.co.in/books/ab...ton&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=1&redir_esc=y
Riemannian:-https://books.google.co.in/books/ab...ton&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=1&redir_esc=y
I am now studying classical one and I have to say that Mercel Berger is a brilliant author. This book gives ideas and some puzzles which @vanhees71 mentioned.

 

[sysprog]

It was meant as a joke. If you know enough mathematicians you know what I mean, but maybe it's even some deeper truth in it, because you have to be open to just play around with ideas and puzzles. It's precisely what's killed when thinking math were like it is presented by Bourbaki. Bourbaki presents the final state of a mathematical subject but doesn't tell you anything about how you get there. In this sense it's like a very good encyclopedia to look up mathematical facts but a lousy textbook, because it's not telling you how in fact to do math.

Nicolas Bourbaki is a pseudonym that is referential to a group of math guys, including Henri Cartan and André Weil $-$ it's math written by commitee, wherefore it's not as apt to show the individual journey by which the author arrived at a conclusion $-$ please imagine what might have happened to Newton's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_of_Fluxionshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_of_Fluxions if he had closely collaborated with Leibniz on single variable calculus . . .

 

[vanhees71]

Sure. I don't critizize the great work by the Bourbaki group but I don't recommend to take these books (and similar textbooks written in this style) as textbooks.

I guess Newton and Leibniz wouldn't have been able to write a coauthored book at all. I'd rather guess one would have rather murdered the other. I'm not sure, whether the two arch enemies ever met in person ;-)).