Which Maths Textbook is Better for Physics Students?

  • Context: Applied 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Jason123456
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Textbook
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion evaluates two prominent mathematics textbooks for physics students: "Mathematical Methods for Physicists" by George B. Arfken and Hans J. Weber, and "Mathematical Methods for Physics and Engineering" by K. F. Riley, M. P. Hobson, and S. J. Bence. Arfken and Weber's book is recommended for students comfortable with calculus, vector calculus, and algebra, while Riley et al. is suggested for those needing a more foundational approach. Both texts serve better as reference materials rather than primary learning resources, and user-friendliness varies based on individual preferences. The conversation highlights the importance of reviewing each book to determine personal suitability.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of calculus up to infinite series
  • Familiarity with vector calculus
  • Basic algebra skills
  • Ability to assess textbook content and user-friendliness
NEXT STEPS
  • Review "Mathematical Methods for Physicists" by George B. Arfken and Hans J. Weber
  • Examine "Mathematical Methods for Physics and Engineering" by K. F. Riley, M. P. Hobson, and S. J. Bence
  • Research additional resources on linear algebra and calculus fundamentals
  • Explore online previews or library copies of both textbooks for personal assessment
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, educators, and anyone seeking to enhance their mathematical foundation for undergraduate physics courses will benefit from this discussion.

Jason123456
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Which one is better?
Mathematical methods for Physicists by George B. Arfken and Hans J. Weber or
Mathematical methods for physics and engineering by K. F. Riley M. P. Hobson and S. J. Bence

P.s Is there a solution manual for the 4th edition of Mathematical methods for Physicists by George B. Arfken and Hans J. Weber ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Better for what? It is really not a well defined question unless you can specify more precisely what it is you are looking for from those books.
 
Hi Orodruin,
Thank you for pointing the ambiguity of the question

I want to know which one is more user-friendly while providing 'enough' maths for a general undergraduate physics course
 
User friendliness is a matter of taste an what one person finds good, others will find too theoretical or too sloppy (or simply not like the approach). Both books are bricks and clearly cover more material than you would be able to in a single course. I do not have any personal experience in learning from either, but my impression is that they generally work better as reference material than for plowing through to learn a subject.

I would suggest that you have a look at each book you consider beforehand (in a library or in an online preview) to find out which you prefer.

Disclosure: The books you mention are two of the main competitors to my own textbook although they start at a lower level with regards to prerequisites and cover many basic topics that I assume the reader has acquired elsewhere.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mastercoin
Awesome
I will have a look at yours as well
 
Orodruin said:
Disclosure: The books you mention are two of the main competitors to my own textbook although they start at a lower level with regards to prerequisites and cover many basic topics that I assume the reader has acquired elsewhere.
Well, but your's is much better than Arfken&Weber! I don't know the book by Riley et al.
 
vanhees71 said:
Well, but your's is much better than Arfken&Weber! I don't know the book by Riley et al.
While I would like to think so, my opinion on the matter would be rather biased I believe. :rolleyes:

Also, the OP will not find the really introductory stuff (like linear algebra and calculus) in my book and I am not completely sure exactly what topics he is considering.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mastercoin
Jason123456 said:
user-friendly

Hobson Riley starts at a level lower than Arfken Weber. If you are comfortable with Calculus upto Infinite Series, Vector Calculus and with Algebra, Arfken Weber is the better choice. If not then Hobson Riley or ML Boas are of similar level both below Arfken Weber.

As @Orodruin has stated all books cover more material than a conventional course would require. So a guide or professor can only guide you what to read, when to read and how to read.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mastercoin

Similar threads

  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
669
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
12K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K