4 ms·

I've been thinking about reading The Feynman Lectures on Physics recently, but I always thought they were essentially textbooks; I was surprised to see them des

I've been thinking about reading The Feynman Lectures on Physics recently, but I always thought they were essentially textbooks; I was surprised to see them described as 'popular' here. I remember reading something about their origin, that some universities tried adopting them with the result being that students found them too difficult (and many professors considered the material to be a sort of fresh take on classical subjects).

kgwgk 10y ago
I share your surprise. The Feynman Lectures on Physics - which by the way are available online at http://feynmanlectures.caltech.edu http://feynmanlectures.caltech.edu - are clearly a popular set of books as in "liked or admired by many people or by a particular person or group," but hardly popular as in "intended for or suited to the taste, understanding, or means of the general public rather than specialists or intellectuals."
mturmon 10y ago
All you have to do is visit the site (e.g., volume 1's TOC is here: http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_toc.html http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_toc.html). Check out some of the first chapters. You expect to see some kind of Newtonian prelude with force, mass, acceleration, motion of projectiles, etc. It's not really there. The FLP are really rewarding to browse around in -- I would hate to have to read it from cover to cover -- but they are not good as a textbook. It's not a systematic treatment. It's an idiosyncratic look at how one person enters a problem space and walks through it. Friends who took classes at Caltech (in the 1980s, I think) using FLP found it to be a bad fit for people who did not have an immediate grasp of problem essentials. In other words, if you did not already have some mastery of the basics, it might not help. I can't imagine the confusion possible when the class was first taught in the 1960s, and there was only the verbal lecture, with no companion text.
kwhitefoot 10y ago
How on earth can they be regarded as too difficult? The Feynman lectures were set books at Exeter Uni. for my applied physics degree '74-'77, I don't remember anyone complaining that they were too difficult, challenging of course.
- wodenokoto 10y ago
  Popular science books and coursework for applied physics degree are generally not expected to have the same level of difficulty.
  - kwhitefoot 10y ago
    The title is 'So you want to learn physics'. If you aren't trying anything challenging you aren't really learning physics, you are just getting a few of the highlights.
    - wodenokoto 10y ago
      No. The site clearly places those lectures under the category "popular". Also, "do you want to learn physics" might as well refer to high school level physics. I know plenty of + 30 who don't have a "high school" level understanding of physics (despite their high school diploma) who might see that headline and think "hmm, maybe I ought too" and they would be barking up the wrong tree. The level of math and physics required to follow a first semester college course in physics is beyond most highschoolers.

kgwgk 10y ago

I share your surprise. The Feynman Lectures on Physics - which by the way are available online at http://feynmanlectures.caltech.edu http://feynmanlectures.caltech.edu - are clearly a popular set of books as in "liked or admired by many people or by a particular person or group," but hardly popular as in "intended for or suited to the taste, understanding, or means of the general public rather than specialists or intellectuals."

mturmon 10y ago

All you have to do is visit the site (e.g., volume 1's TOC is here: http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_toc.html http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_toc.html). Check out some of the first chapters. You expect to see some kind of Newtonian prelude with force, mass, acceleration, motion of projectiles, etc. It's not really there. The FLP are really rewarding to browse around in -- I would hate to have to read it from cover to cover -- but they are not good as a textbook. It's not a systematic treatment. It's an idiosyncratic look at how one person enters a problem space and walks through it. Friends who took classes at Caltech (in the 1980s, I think) using FLP found it to be a bad fit for people who did not have an immediate grasp of problem essentials. In other words, if you did not already have some mastery of the basics, it might not help. I can't imagine the confusion possible when the class was first taught in the 1960s, and there was only the verbal lecture, with no companion text.

kwhitefoot 10y ago

How on earth can they be regarded as too difficult? The Feynman lectures were set books at Exeter Uni. for my applied physics degree '74-'77, I don't remember anyone complaining that they were too difficult, challenging of course.

wodenokoto 10y ago
Popular science books and coursework for applied physics degree are generally not expected to have the same level of difficulty.
- kwhitefoot 10y ago
  The title is 'So you want to learn physics'. If you aren't trying anything challenging you aren't really learning physics, you are just getting a few of the highlights.
  - wodenokoto 10y ago
    No. The site clearly places those lectures under the category "popular". Also, "do you want to learn physics" might as well refer to high school level physics. I know plenty of + 30 who don't have a "high school" level understanding of physics (despite their high school diploma) who might see that headline and think "hmm, maybe I ought too" and they would be barking up the wrong tree. The level of math and physics required to follow a first semester college course in physics is beyond most highschoolers.