What is the difference between 'Physics' and 'Fundamentals of Physics'

  • Thread starter Thread starter physicsisgrea
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Difference Physics
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the differences between the textbooks "Physics" by Halliday, Resnick, and Krane, and "Fundamentals of Physics" by Halliday, Resnick, and Walker. Participants explore their suitability for an undergraduate introductory course covering Newtonian mechanics, electromagnetism, and optics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that "Physics" is described as suitable for engineers and science majors, while "Fundamentals of Physics" is specifically aimed at engineers, suggesting a more applied approach.
  • One participant questions whether self-study might benefit from an OpenCourseWare (OCW) course alongside the textbook for structured learning.
  • A participant expresses a personal opinion that "Physics" is superior based on their experience in high school.
  • Another participant mentions that "Fundamentals of Physics" is perceived as more basic, with simplified examples, while "Physics" may cater to a broader range of levels.
  • One participant indicates that Krane's text is more advanced than Walker's, recommending the use of "Physics" for an undergraduate review of introductory physics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing opinions on which textbook is better suited for undergraduate courses, with no consensus reached on a definitive answer.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference the intended audience and complexity of the textbooks, but the discussion does not resolve the implications of these factors for specific learning outcomes.

physicsisgrea
Messages
25
Reaction score
1
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
According to the book descriptions, "Physics" is suitable for engineers and science majors and "Fundamentals of Physics" is for engineers. So, it sounds like the latter is geared towards more of an applied approach to the material. So, which one is "better" depends entirely on what you wish to get out of it.
 
Is this for self-study? Consider whether it would be better to choose an OCW course and get the textbook, so you have a structured plan and extra assignments and exams to help you.

PS. I mention this because you mentioned suitability for an undergraduate course.
 
I used both these books in high school. IMO "Physics" is way better.
 
I have also used both recently, Krane is more advanced than Walker. So for Undergrad Course (Review Introductory Physics Book) you can go with Resnick, Halliday & Krane Text. (I have its 5th Edition)
 
I'm sure it will tell you in the preface. Each textbook is usually aimed at a particular level. "Fundamental physics" sounds as if it is aimed at teaching the basic classical physics and with simplified examples. The "Physics" textbook could be aimed at ANY level, out of context.
 

Similar threads

High Energy What is the level of Aitchison & Hey's QFT books?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Engineering Need Advice on Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics Textbook
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
High Energy (free kindle) Gauge Theories in Particle Physics by Aitchison & Hey
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Classical What is the Difference Between the 4th and 5th Edition of HRK Physics?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Self teaching Calculus for physics?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
Intro Physics Competitive Physics by Jinhui Wang and Bernard Ricardo
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Intro Physics Seeking a good Undergraduate physics textbook
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
15K
Particle Thomson (Modern Particle Physics) & Schwartz (Quantum Field Theory)
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • Poll Poll
Intro Physics Fundamentals of Physics by David Halliday
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
7K
Looking for Readings on Dark Matter
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K