/sci/ - Science & Math

General physics courses are a fucking joke. The only reason this turd is used is because of the problem set which at the end isn't even that great.

This book has examples with like 1 or 2 missing variables, but then gives problems with 3 or 4 missing variables. It's pretty hard to follow and the formulas and specific constants are scattered throughout the chapter Willy nilly.

>>9332967
Definitely the worst book I used as an undergrad. Not shitty to the point it's unusable but it's worth pointing out to anyone unfortunate enough to fall for the chemistry meme.

>inconsistent notation used throughout the book, even in the same chapter
>no examples or questions so you can't practice
>diagram explaining the difference between D, I and A mechanisms (first lecture content) is wrong
>subject material isn't particularly interesting to begin with but if you don't like inorganic chemistry when you start the book you'll fucking hate it when you finish

This and most other books published by Wiley

>Minimal information on experimental techniques which is so crucial to biochemistry
>Gives historical context to everything which distracts from the technical material and makes the chapters needlessly long
>Rather than putting all citations at the end of the chapter, they did in text parenthetical which makes the paragraphs even longer
>HUNDREDS of confusing pictures of protein structures with no description other than information about the person that took them

End of chapter problems and the solution PDF our prof gave out were probably the only redeeming qualities of this piece of shit

Also: Don't fall for the biochemistry meme like I did

>>9332967
Fucking Serway. All of his books are given as an intro, and they're damn rubbish. Goes on and on and fucking on about the simplest things, gives you one basic "plug the numbers in the equation" example, and then bombards you with 80 exercises per chapter that are 10 times more advanced than the example. I don't have a problem with scaling difficulty, I seek it, but I need a strong basis.

>>9333219
Griffiths is not that bad as an intro.

>>9333222
those dgtz

Haha

Massively overrated. Programming: Principles and Practice Using C++ is orders of magnitude better if you want to read something by Stroustrup that's actually good, but you can tell from the first page of this thing that he had no idea how to write for an undergrad audience.

>in-text examples are insultingly easy but the questions are autistically hard
>dire need of a glossary, from the get go the reader is drowned in terminology pulled from Stroustrup's asshole
>reference manual at the end sums up the essentials but chapter summaries would have done the same thing and made the book more readable as a whole
>literally no reason to use this book over Principles and Practice or the internet