3 ms·

As someone with a mathematical background, I was wondering what were some motivations for wanting to "learn physics"? Not being argumentative, just genuinely cu

by 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.

by imranq 9y ago

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.