4 ms·

On the other side of the spectrum, I would recommend Spivak's Physics for Mathematicians [1] strongly. I don't think anything else could come close for a mathem

by ulucs 9y ago

On the other side of the spectrum, I would recommend Spivak's Physics for Mathematicians [1] strongly. I don't think anything else could come close for a mathematician who wants to learn physics. [] https://www.amazon.com/Physics-Mathematicians-Mechanics-Michael-Spivak/dp/0914098322 https://www.amazon.com/Physics-Mathematicians-Mechanics-Mich...

filmor 9y ago
For QFT, I liked this one a lot: Folland, QFT - A Tourist Guide for Mathematicians[1]. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Theory-Mathematical-Surveys-Monographs/dp/0821847058 https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Theory-Mathematical-Surveys-M...
jostylr 9y ago
For relativity, there is the venerable General Relativity for Mathematicians. https://www.amazon.com/General-Relativity-Mathematicians-Graduate-Mathematics/dp/038790218X https://www.amazon.com/General-Relativity-Mathematicians-Gra...
imranq 9y ago
As someone with a mathematical background, I was wondering what were some motivations for wanting to "learn physics"? Not being argumentative, just genuinely curious on what drives people to self study textbooks on physics after college/grad school.
- nicklaf 9y ago
  I will defer to others to write a general apology for mathematics. Here I will simply mention the reason Michael Spivak has given for writing books: namely, to learn the subject himself. Because of this, I would suggest that anything written by Spivak is worth reading. So, why study physics? Answer: because Michael Spivak has written a book on the subject. Consequently, you now have available to you a map for understanding a subject with no less clarity than the mathematician who wrote it.
  - JabavuAdams 9y ago
    What? Spivak is alive!? That's great. I honestly never even considered looking him up on YouTube. I just assumed he was dead. This is like finding out that Feynman is still alive and giving lectures that I haven't seen.
- JabavuAdams 9y ago
  * I wanted to major in physics, but went into computer engineering instead. * Physics always seemed glamorous. I know the reality is different, but studying physics makes me feel like a wizard (EDIT: in training). * I want to be able to read pop-physics and actually be able to dissect it. * I want to be able to simulate GR. * I want to understand QFT * I want to be able to simulate atoms and molecules from first-principles. * I want to UNDERSTAND
  - smaddox 9y ago
    If you haven't already, I highly recommend Feynman's Lectures on Physics: http://feynmanlectures.caltech.edu http://feynmanlectures.caltech.edu While much more advanced than typical introductory texts, it does provide deeper insights than typical introductory texts, which makes it worth the investment.
    - JabavuAdams 9y ago
      I'm more at the level of Goldstein for Mechanics, and learning about the Lagrangian. Of course, there's still much to learn from Feynman.
    - 52-6F-62 9y ago
      I'm a beginner, thinking about returning to school for physics, but I'm dipping in with this tome I purchased recently. He's a great explainer for someone at my level. And I have to brush up on all of the math (and learn calculus...) in order to fully understand. It's exciting that reading him isn't just a cold hard wall. It's proving to be a great guide into what to sort of triage my studies. I strongly second this one! (Though I have to admit that I purchased a not-cheap edition of the first volume to get started -- though I prefer reading from paper, and don't yet own an eReader and have a bit of a burgeoning library anyway. But thanks for the link! it's nice to have the rest on hand).
  - jxy 9y ago
    > * I want to be able to simulate GR. > * I want to understand QFT > * I want to be able to simulate atoms and molecules from first-principles. With the current technology, assuming standard model of particle physics (which is QFT) is the first-principle, simulating atoms would take trillions of the age of the universe, let alone molecules, or any effect of GR.
- dbranes 9y ago
  A lot of contemporary mathematics have physical roots. Some things I like: Donaldson theory and Seiberg-Witten theory in differential topology, Gromov-Witten theory in sympletic/algebraic geometry. Knowing physics is not necessary to learn these things, but some rough idea of what QFT is doesn't hurt.
- b_emery 9y ago
  For me it was that physics was about reality. In high school the key moment occurred when in a physics lab, after calculating and measuring and calculating more, we placed a cup on the floor, rolled a marble down the ramp and off the desk - and it landed in the cup! At that moment I realized that all the math I had been studying actually meant something in the real world, and was useful for explaining questions I had about the world.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
MaysonL 9y ago
And if the price is a bit much for you, check out http://alpha.math.uga.edu/~shifrin/Spivak_physics.pdf http://alpha.math.uga.edu/~shifrin/Spivak_physics.pdf Elementary Mechanics from a Mathematician's Viewpoint which is based on eight lectures Spivak gave in 2004, and which he says "As explained in Lecture 1, these lectures cover material that I had just finished writing, and which I hope will constitute the ˇrst part of a book on Mechanics for Mathematicians."
- dhimes 9y ago
  Holy Shit the price!! No wonder students steal books.
  - JabavuAdams 9y ago
    Probably because it's out of print, and sold used from private sellers. My copy of On Lisp cost like $300.
    - cheaprentalyeti 9y ago
      I thought _On Lisp_ was available as a free pdf, which should have caused the price to drop. (I think he joked about the people who were planning to retire on the proceeds at the time). I just checked Amazon, and it turns out the lowest price one is $ 52.00, and the one I thought was a reprint turned out to be upon closer examination a translation into Japanese. (Which is about thirty dollars or so, from 2007).
      - JabavuAdams 9y ago
        I already had the PDF, but wanted a nice small book with the same form factor as ANSI Common Lisp. I guess I was making a lot of money at the time, and this is before I had completely come around to e-books.
danharaj 9y ago
This book is fantastic! It's Spivak so it doesn't sacrifice prose for precision, and it does more than teach physics from a mathematical point of view. It also illustrates the massive gap between theoretical physics and experimental physics-- why physics is so hard. An early example in the book is trying to calculate the way a chain hanging off an edge falls: Several pages of investigation reveal how devilishly hard it is to apply the theory to a particular problem-- even demonstrating that a popular physics book gets the problem wrong and the best guide for how to analyze it correctly is experiment. I hope there's a sequel!
dbranes 9y ago
Also on this side of the spectrum, other near-encyclopedic volumes on physics written for mathematicians that I love: The Clay Institute Monograph on D-Branes (http://www.claymath.org/library/monographs/cmim04.pdf http://www.claymath.org/library/monographs/cmim04.pdf) The 1996 IAS semester on QFT (https://www.math.ias.edu/qft https://www.math.ias.edu/qft)

by ulucs 9y ago

filmor 9y ago

For QFT, I liked this one a lot: Folland, QFT - A Tourist Guide for Mathematicians[1]. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Theory-Mathematical-Surveys-Monographs/dp/0821847058 https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Theory-Mathematical-Surveys-M...

jostylr 9y ago

For relativity, there is the venerable General Relativity for Mathematicians. https://www.amazon.com/General-Relativity-Mathematicians-Graduate-Mathematics/dp/038790218X https://www.amazon.com/General-Relativity-Mathematicians-Gra...

imranq 9y ago

As someone with a mathematical background, I was wondering what were some motivations for wanting to "learn physics"? Not being argumentative, just genuinely curious on what drives people to self study textbooks on physics after college/grad school.

nicklaf 9y ago
I will defer to others to write a general apology for mathematics. Here I will simply mention the reason Michael Spivak has given for writing books: namely, to learn the subject himself. Because of this, I would suggest that anything written by Spivak is worth reading. So, why study physics? Answer: because Michael Spivak has written a book on the subject. Consequently, you now have available to you a map for understanding a subject with no less clarity than the mathematician who wrote it.
- JabavuAdams 9y ago
  What? Spivak is alive!? That's great. I honestly never even considered looking him up on YouTube. I just assumed he was dead. This is like finding out that Feynman is still alive and giving lectures that I haven't seen.
JabavuAdams 9y ago
* I wanted to major in physics, but went into computer engineering instead. * Physics always seemed glamorous. I know the reality is different, but studying physics makes me feel like a wizard (EDIT: in training). * I want to be able to read pop-physics and actually be able to dissect it. * I want to be able to simulate GR. * I want to understand QFT * I want to be able to simulate atoms and molecules from first-principles. * I want to UNDERSTAND
- smaddox 9y ago
  If you haven't already, I highly recommend Feynman's Lectures on Physics: http://feynmanlectures.caltech.edu http://feynmanlectures.caltech.edu While much more advanced than typical introductory texts, it does provide deeper insights than typical introductory texts, which makes it worth the investment.
  - JabavuAdams 9y ago
    I'm more at the level of Goldstein for Mechanics, and learning about the Lagrangian. Of course, there's still much to learn from Feynman.
  - 52-6F-62 9y ago
    I'm a beginner, thinking about returning to school for physics, but I'm dipping in with this tome I purchased recently. He's a great explainer for someone at my level. And I have to brush up on all of the math (and learn calculus...) in order to fully understand. It's exciting that reading him isn't just a cold hard wall. It's proving to be a great guide into what to sort of triage my studies. I strongly second this one! (Though I have to admit that I purchased a not-cheap edition of the first volume to get started -- though I prefer reading from paper, and don't yet own an eReader and have a bit of a burgeoning library anyway. But thanks for the link! it's nice to have the rest on hand).
- jxy 9y ago
  > * I want to be able to simulate GR. > * I want to understand QFT > * I want to be able to simulate atoms and molecules from first-principles. With the current technology, assuming standard model of particle physics (which is QFT) is the first-principle, simulating atoms would take trillions of the age of the universe, let alone molecules, or any effect of GR.
dbranes 9y ago
A lot of contemporary mathematics have physical roots. Some things I like: Donaldson theory and Seiberg-Witten theory in differential topology, Gromov-Witten theory in sympletic/algebraic geometry. Knowing physics is not necessary to learn these things, but some rough idea of what QFT is doesn't hurt.
b_emery 9y ago
For me it was that physics was about reality. In high school the key moment occurred when in a physics lab, after calculating and measuring and calculating more, we placed a cup on the floor, rolled a marble down the ramp and off the desk - and it landed in the cup! At that moment I realized that all the math I had been studying actually meant something in the real world, and was useful for explaining questions I had about the world.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

MaysonL 9y ago

And if the price is a bit much for you, check out http://alpha.math.uga.edu/~shifrin/Spivak_physics.pdf http://alpha.math.uga.edu/~shifrin/Spivak_physics.pdf Elementary Mechanics from a Mathematician's Viewpoint which is based on eight lectures Spivak gave in 2004, and which he says "As explained in Lecture 1, these lectures cover material that I had just finished writing, and which I hope will constitute the ˇrst part of a book on Mechanics for Mathematicians."

dhimes 9y ago
Holy Shit the price!! No wonder students steal books.
- JabavuAdams 9y ago
  Probably because it's out of print, and sold used from private sellers. My copy of On Lisp cost like $300.
  - cheaprentalyeti 9y ago
    I thought _On Lisp_ was available as a free pdf, which should have caused the price to drop. (I think he joked about the people who were planning to retire on the proceeds at the time). I just checked Amazon, and it turns out the lowest price one is $ 52.00, and the one I thought was a reprint turned out to be upon closer examination a translation into Japanese. (Which is about thirty dollars or so, from 2007).
    - JabavuAdams 9y ago
      I already had the PDF, but wanted a nice small book with the same form factor as ANSI Common Lisp. I guess I was making a lot of money at the time, and this is before I had completely come around to e-books.

danharaj 9y ago

This book is fantastic! It's Spivak so it doesn't sacrifice prose for precision, and it does more than teach physics from a mathematical point of view. It also illustrates the massive gap between theoretical physics and experimental physics-- why physics is so hard. An early example in the book is trying to calculate the way a chain hanging off an edge falls: Several pages of investigation reveal how devilishly hard it is to apply the theory to a particular problem-- even demonstrating that a popular physics book gets the problem wrong and the best guide for how to analyze it correctly is experiment. I hope there's a sequel!

dbranes 9y ago

Also on this side of the spectrum, other near-encyclopedic volumes on physics written for mathematicians that I love: The Clay Institute Monograph on D-Branes (http://www.claymath.org/library/monographs/cmim04.pdf http://www.claymath.org/library/monographs/cmim04.pdf) The 1996 IAS semester on QFT (https://www.math.ias.edu/qft https://www.math.ias.edu/qft)