[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 37 KB, 300x420, 1308929317764.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3311948 No.3311948 [Reply] [Original]

Finished A-lvels, taking a gap year.
How do I prepare for studying theoretical physics in the UK?
What textbooks should I buy? What areas of mathematics and physics deserve most focus in the year-and-a-bit that I have to prepare?
Cheers

>> No.3311966

Buy Feynman's lectures on physics. He will teach you physics and how to think like a (theoretical) physicist. He doesn't invest time in problem solving, which is why you should look to a standard textbook for problems.

Is that Paul Erdos in the pic? That classy motherfucker

>> No.3311978

>>3311948
>Picture is before science help fit him into a wheelchair.
>Science is a failure as it can't get him back out of said wheelchair.
>All of sci is fags who can't fix anything not even a little red wagon.

>> No.3311980

>>3311966
It's Hawking. Any other suggestions on specific textbooks and the like?

>> No.3311996

>>3311980
You know since MIT and Stanford have their classes up on the web, I would say check that out since it's free. Problem sets + tests + solutions in most cases.

>> No.3312010

>>3311996
Excellent. I've been checking out Susskind's String Theory lectures through these means, I'll have to look at some more.

>> No.3312021

>>3312010
Is it just me or does Susskind seem like an asshole most of the time, and not quite on top of shit when he is questioned?

>> No.3312035

>>3312021
I don't think he's quite an asshole. He doesn't seem to have much patience though. And I agree, he does seem a bit scatterbrained.

>> No.3312387

bump before bedtime

>> No.3312444

"Mathematical Methods for Physics and Engineering" by Riley et al. presupposes A level knowledge of maths and nothing else. Don't be put off by the easiness of the first few chapters. When you have internalised this material you should be prepared for "Mathematical Methods for Physics" by Arfken and Weber.

"Classical Mechanics" by Kibble and Berkshire is a good first book on classical mechanics as is "Classical Mechanics" by Gregory.

"Introduction to Electrodynamics" and "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" both by Griffiths will be readable after knowledge of classical mechanics is obtained. After these try "Statistical Mechanics" by Mandl (you can't seem to go wrong with the Manchester series in physics - you could probably read the books from that series on EM and QM instead of Griffiths).

When you have read as a minimum Riley, Kibble, the two Griffiths, and Mandl's Statistical Physics you might be able to handle "A first course in string theory" if that's your cup of tea.

If you need more suggestions check the Oxford physics website for their course guide, which lists books for every module and includes syllabus for every module too.

>> No.3312455

>>3312444

Forgot to mention, don't worry about even finishing off Riley before embarking on the physics. You should be prepared for Kibble right now.

>> No.3312567

>>3312444
Thank you very much

>> No.3312604

>>3311948
You buy this book:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Road-Reality-Complete-Guide-Universe/dp/0099440687/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qi
d=1309477730&sr=8-1

Thank me in ~1 year

>> No.3312629

>>3312604

I should explain. Its not a textbook, but that does NOT mean its a popsci book for the layman. Just look at the reviews of people who have no background in Physics to know that. It contains a brief overview of all the modern stuff. There are Maths undergrads who couldn't keep up with the Mathematics in the book, and Penrose claims its for the layman. Its not.

Its (one of) my Summer readings lined up before I too start Physics next year. I was recommended it by the Physics admissions tutor at my old university since I'm a transferring not new student. So its not just a popsci book the Physics admissions tutor recommended it himself.

>> No.3312659

>>3312604

THIS.

It's a real doorstopper, and can be a bit dense, but it is very, VERY much worth the read. It's basically a complete play by play of the entire history of math, physics, and astronomy.

>> No.3312669

>>3312604
ill third this, just read it and helped me view tensor analyses better than the textbooks I have.

>> No.3312690

in the US, this is the "general" list of physics textbooks that are most common amongst students:

1) Griffiths quantum
2) Griffiths electrodynamics
3) Kitell intro to solid state
4) Shankar Quantum
5) griffiths intro to elementary particle physics.
6) Boas Mathematical Methods in the Theoretical Sciences


there are a variety of thermal(thermo)/statistical(mechanics) and advanced classical textbooks, as well as a variety of "general" physics texts used for the lower division classes.


here are some recommendations of texts I know of:

1)Strauss, PDE
2)Axler Linear Algebra Done Right
3)McQuarrie Statistical Mechanics (Graduate text)
The Kaplan Advanced Calculus textbooks is not bad. it actually serves well for higher level study in PDE and functional analysis.

>> No.3312699

>>3312690


I should point out, that while the Griffiths texts are exceedingly common...

they are not all very good.


The Electrodynamics text is probably the best... but the Quantum text is woefully inadequate.

people like it because it is suuper simple to understand.

it is also very very short (seriously, its a fucking tiny book).


it is also much more in line with simple, "plug and chug" quantum examples...

Shankar is much more deep, mathematically rigorous, and exceedingly long.

seriously you barely get anywhere in the entire book, and its like 600 pages long and mammoth.


but they are a great pair to use to study advanced quantum in your 3rd/4th year.

>> No.3312703

Sorry, bit off topic;
>taking a gap year
Why? You do realize your tuition fee's will be at least doubled.