3 ms·

The Feynman lectures were specially designed for creme de la creme undergrads who already did a course in physics in high school. They are a terrible way for a

The Feynman lectures were specially designed for creme de la creme undergrads who already did a course in physics in high school. They are a terrible way for a noob to try to learn. Also strange that the author warns against exotic topics and then 3/5 of these recommendations are exotic things 99.9% of readers will never encounter.

anta40 8y ago
My major subject in highschool (2001-2004) was science. Now I work as a software developer. Yes I admit my physics knowledge is already rusty, and would like to refresh it. On a glance, The Feynman Lectures looks pretty doable...
pge 8y ago
I also recall hearing that as an undegrad curriculum, the lectures never worked well (even when feynman himself was teaching them). His way of understanding physics is beautiful but not intuitive for most people. I read them after getting a degree in physics and it was fascinating to see his approach precisely because it was so different (and elegant) than the way it is typically taught, but I could not have understood them nearly as well if I had not already learned the concepts in a more traditional way. All that is to say- The Feynman lectures are wonderful, but I would not recommend them as a first text.
- derangedHorse 8y ago
  I disagree. As someone who doesn't know much about Physics, certain things I read in the Feynman lectures today still stick with me. Like if you drop a heavy object onto the floor, its temperature rises by a minuscule amount lol.
  - anonytrary 8y ago
    > Like if you drop a heavy object onto the floor, its temperature rises by a minuscule amount lol. Tidbits like this are not a substitute for a working knowledge of physics. The Feynman Lectures are not a substitute for undergraduate courses. You'll get more out of the Feynman Lectures after completing the main undergraduate courses.
    - derangedHorse 8y ago
      I'm not sure what you define as a 'working' knowledge of Physics, but to get to a research level of physics requires more than a few introductory physics course also. I'm not saying the Feynman lectures is a substitute for learning any specific part of Physics, but it is useful for understanding basic concepts and also understanding how those concepts can fit in to our everyday lives. What I disagreed about in the post I replied to was the position that it wasn't "intuitive" or a good first text for beginners.
- abecedarius 8y ago
  Counterpoint: "Memories of Feynman's lectures" at http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_90.html http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_90.html Every time this topic comes up, someone says they heard nth-hand that the lectures didn't work. I suspect it's folklore that grew out of Feynman's disappointment expressed in his preface. I studied them together with the official text in my undergrad courses, and found them helpful, FWIW.
abecedarius 8y ago
They're definitely aimed at the type of student who gets into Caltech. My general advice would be to give them a go if you're interested, because they're wonderful, but be open to switching to other texts if it's not working so well. I kind of think the whole OP should be subject to the same caveat: Susan Fowler is probably not just hardworking but very very smart, and you shouldn't necessarily expect comparable results. It may go like the guy who tried to become a golf pro on the 10,000-hours theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_McLaughlin_(golfer) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_McLaughlin_(golfer)
thr0waway235 8y ago
>Also strange that the author warns against exotic topics and then 3/5 of these recommendations are exotic things 99.9% of readers will never encounter. I don't think you understand what "exotic" means in this context. Literally everything on this list except QFT is something pretty much every physicist will study. (And every theorist will study QFT.) No coincidence that it's almost topic for topic what I studied in grad school. This is "how to actually learn physics", not "how to learn a subset of physics." Exotic topics would be quantum loop gravity or supersymmetry; things which sound cool but aren't foundational in the same way.

anta40 8y ago

My major subject in highschool (2001-2004) was science. Now I work as a software developer. Yes I admit my physics knowledge is already rusty, and would like to refresh it. On a glance, The Feynman Lectures looks pretty doable...

pge 8y ago

I also recall hearing that as an undegrad curriculum, the lectures never worked well (even when feynman himself was teaching them). His way of understanding physics is beautiful but not intuitive for most people. I read them after getting a degree in physics and it was fascinating to see his approach precisely because it was so different (and elegant) than the way it is typically taught, but I could not have understood them nearly as well if I had not already learned the concepts in a more traditional way. All that is to say- The Feynman lectures are wonderful, but I would not recommend them as a first text.

derangedHorse 8y ago
I disagree. As someone who doesn't know much about Physics, certain things I read in the Feynman lectures today still stick with me. Like if you drop a heavy object onto the floor, its temperature rises by a minuscule amount lol.
- anonytrary 8y ago
  > Like if you drop a heavy object onto the floor, its temperature rises by a minuscule amount lol. Tidbits like this are not a substitute for a working knowledge of physics. The Feynman Lectures are not a substitute for undergraduate courses. You'll get more out of the Feynman Lectures after completing the main undergraduate courses.
  - derangedHorse 8y ago
    I'm not sure what you define as a 'working' knowledge of Physics, but to get to a research level of physics requires more than a few introductory physics course also. I'm not saying the Feynman lectures is a substitute for learning any specific part of Physics, but it is useful for understanding basic concepts and also understanding how those concepts can fit in to our everyday lives. What I disagreed about in the post I replied to was the position that it wasn't "intuitive" or a good first text for beginners.
abecedarius 8y ago
Counterpoint: "Memories of Feynman's lectures" at http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_90.html http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_90.html Every time this topic comes up, someone says they heard nth-hand that the lectures didn't work. I suspect it's folklore that grew out of Feynman's disappointment expressed in his preface. I studied them together with the official text in my undergrad courses, and found them helpful, FWIW.

abecedarius 8y ago

They're definitely aimed at the type of student who gets into Caltech. My general advice would be to give them a go if you're interested, because they're wonderful, but be open to switching to other texts if it's not working so well. I kind of think the whole OP should be subject to the same caveat: Susan Fowler is probably not just hardworking but very very smart, and you shouldn't necessarily expect comparable results. It may go like the guy who tried to become a golf pro on the 10,000-hours theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_McLaughlin_(golfer) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_McLaughlin_(golfer)

thr0waway235 8y ago

>Also strange that the author warns against exotic topics and then 3/5 of these recommendations are exotic things 99.9% of readers will never encounter. I don't think you understand what "exotic" means in this context. Literally everything on this list except QFT is something pretty much every physicist will study. (And every theorist will study QFT.) No coincidence that it's almost topic for topic what I studied in grad school. This is "how to actually learn physics", not "how to learn a subset of physics." Exotic topics would be quantum loop gravity or supersymmetry; things which sound cool but aren't foundational in the same way.