Progression of Math Textbooks for Self-Studying

[Anonymous No.11273520]

Awhile ago I found a progression of physics textbooks on here that has been really useful. I'm looking to self-study math from the ~high-school level, and am looking for a similar suggestion. I am posting the physics example from before -- does anyone have a similar image for math?

I have seen the progression of math topics, but not with specific books. Also, the /sci google page provides several links to blogs/etc, but the lists are not definitive/are overwhelming. Thank you for any help.

[Anonymous No.11273525]

>>11273520

[Anonymous No.11273565]

>>11273525
Meme

[Anonymous No.11273620]

>>11273520
This pic is as much of a meme as >>11273565 is.
Reading Goldstein's classical mechanics isn't really going to be that much useful when you've already saw what a Lagrangian and Hamiltonian is with Taylor. It's something you should read only if you're interested in the topic.

Path integrals, QED and QFT are already extremely advanced and specialised. Again, only attempt to do these if you liked what you saw in QM and in relativity.
I would argue that relativity is more or less on the same topic, and GR is something you should only attempt if you've liked the more math-heavy book and you're interested in the topic.

The pic also lacks basic chemistry, mathematical methods, fluid mechanics, and solid-state beyond Oxford intro. Something like Kittel (which is a bad book that everyone recommends) or Ashcroft.

[Anonymous No.11273629]

>>11273620
Do you have a better progression? I need some sort of plan I can stick to for both math and physics.

[Anonymous No.11273640]

>>11273629

[Anonymous No.11273652]

>>11273629
For math:
>>11273525 is mostly correct, just don't go to the end of a textbook before moving on to the next. Ahflors begins softly, but the book gets incredibly complex as he goes on, and his terminology isn't always standard.
Book of "proofs" aren't that useful. You learn to prove by doing exercise, getting inspired by reading well-developed proofs in textbooks, and proving shit yourself. Linear Algebra is probably the easiest "intro to proof" there is.

I'm not familiar with all the books here but you'd also need a book to tell you how numbers are constructed, which I assume is in set theory.

On physics, just start with undergrad books on Classical Mechanics, QM (Feynman or Cohen are very good), Electromagnetism, then when you're comfortable with basic QM, do some statistical physics and then just pick up a textbook, go through it very quickly, and see if you want to learn it.

[Anonymous No.11273657]

it’s all so tiresome

[Anonymous No.11273667]

>>11273640

That's gotta be a meme, right? Unless you're a genius, that curriculum is insanely difficult. I doubt even grad students at princeton went through something like that lol.

[Anonymous No.11273698]

[Anonymous No.11273706]

>>11273698

Is the punch line that real math like analysis and algebra is hard while category theory is ez? In any case, I see a lot of mediocre math majors study category theory, so it checks out.

[Anonymous No.11273713]

>>11273706
>Is the punch line that real math like analysis and algebra is hard while category theory is ez?
Pretty much. It's what weak students study to appear smart.

[Anonymous No.11273791]

>>11273520
>Awhile ago I found a progression of physics textbooks on here that has been really useful
>I'm looking to self-study math from the ~high-school level
wat? How could the physics list be helpful if you don't know high school level math to actually read any of them?

Just pick a book from each section:
https://4chan-science.fandom.com/wiki/Mathematics#Precalculus
https://4chan-science.fandom.com/wiki/Mathematics#Calculus
https://4chan-science.fandom.com/wiki/Mathematics#Multivariable_and_Vector_Calculus
https://4chan-science.fandom.com/wiki/Mathematics#Matrix_Algebra
https://4chan-science.fandom.com/wiki/Mathematics#Ordinary_Differential_Equations
https://4chan-science.fandom.com/wiki/Mathematics#Fourier_Transforms
https://4chan-science.fandom.com/wiki/Mathematics#Complex_Variables
https://4chan-science.fandom.com/wiki/Mathematics#Partial_Differential_Equations

[Anonymous No.11273796]

>>11273620
>Reading Goldstein's classical mechanics isn't really going to be that much useful when you've already saw what a Lagrangian and Hamiltonian is with Taylor

[math]\bf{ BAIT}[/math]