/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.7187491]

What is the "bible" of your subfield? Pic related is mine.

[Anonymous No.7187516]

[Anonymous No.7187541]

[Anonymous No.7187543]

[Anonymous No.7187553]

Streater & Wightman.

[Anonymous No.7187560]

>>7187553
Spin, Statistics and All That? Pretty good, mate.

[Anonymous No.7187562]

>>7187491
Isn't that the volume about distrbutions? What do you work on.

[Anonymous No.7187565]

>>7187560
Yep.

[Anonymous No.7187566]

[Anonymous No.7187571]

>>7187543
well meme'd my friend

[Anonymous No.7187600]

This book has been good to me throughout my entire undergrad. CS major btw.

[Anonymous No.7187615]

>>7187491
So you're into PDEs? What's your opinion on Taylor's books?

[Anonymous No.7187707]

>>7187562
hyperbolic pde, FIOs, and applications. Its the most accessible of the series, the other 3 are extremely terse, but useful as well.
>>7187615
Never seen Taylor's books, sorry.

[Anonymous No.7187723]

[Anonymous No.7187856]

>>7187491

Amazingly, I got Hormander for 99 cents... university bookstore closeout!

[Anonymous No.7187866]

>>7187707

https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2012/11/30/lars-hormander/https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2012/11/30/lars-hormander/

[Anonymous No.7187871]

>>7187516
Great book. Probably one of the essential books to read if you're looking to be a 10xer.

[Anonymous No.7187873]

>>7187543
holy shit lol he really is a kook

[Anonymous No.7187881]

>>7187600
What subfield has a random python book as its "bible"? or did you just feel like posting it for whatever reason?

[Anonymous No.7187885]

>>7187881
Software engineering

And it's not a random Python book, it's the definitive Python book. Every great programmer has that book on their desk.

[Anonymous No.7187891]

[Anonymous No.7187893]

[Anonymous No.7187894]

>>7187885
>python
>great programmer

[Anonymous No.7187901]

>>7187885
A book on a languages syntax isn't really a great bible for software engineering.

Something like Code Complete is a much better choice.

[Anonymous No.7187923]

>>7187901
>Micro$oft
No thanks.

[Anonymous No.7187929]

>>7187491

[Anonymous No.7187933]

>>7187600
Fuck right off.

>>7187516
>OO, Design Patterns, UML, Agile Methodologies
Steer well clear.

SICP and TPOP are cornerstones.

[Anonymous No.7187936]

>>7187929

>My field is pop sci

[Anonymous No.7187946]

>>7187893
THIS

[Anonymous No.7187948]

>>7187933
>OO, Design Patterns, UML, Agile Methodologies
>Steer well clear.

>I hate being productive and having a real job! I just want to code the next templeOS in my basement!

Please.

[Anonymous No.7187957]

>>7187723
mah nigga

[Anonymous No.7187982]

>>7187723
>>7187957

>not EGA

plebians

[Anonymous No.7187983]

[Anonymous No.7187996]

>>7187933

TPOP 11/10 book

infact everything by Kernighan is great, im looking forward to his go book

[Anonymous No.7188004]

Saxon is my god

[Anonymous No.7188009]

>>7187936
Yup

[Anonymous No.7188020]

>>7187893

i just lost

[Anonymous No.7188025]

>>7187491
>2015
>bibles
*tips crucifix*

[Anonymous No.7188030]

>>7188020
>>>/b/
>8 years ago

[Anonymous No.7188036]

[Anonymous No.7188041]

[Anonymous No.7188127]

also Boyd's nonlinear optics

[Anonymous No.7188131]

>>7187873
why do you think hese a meme

[Anonymous No.7188132]

>>7187893
this is for engineering btw

[Anonymous No.7188138]

>>7187948
Stock response.

>>7187996
Good stuff.

[Anonymous No.7188140]

>>7188127
Do you have any knowledge in laser diffraction and interference? I have to make a diffraction grating for a laser and I have some questions.

[Anonymous No.7188147]

Not exactly the bible, but it's pretty damn standard. A good reference book. I like it a lot.

[Anonymous No.7188154]

[Anonymous No.7188160]

>>7187707
>Never seen Taylor's books, sorry.
I'd say they are better than Hormander tbh, especially if you're into mathematical physics or geometric analysis.

[Anonymous No.7188163]

>>7188140
Sure ask away or maybe better to make a new thread about it. I work on military research projects that involve multiple beam interference and beam combination with diffraction gratings.

[Anonymous No.7188167]

[Anonymous No.7188168]

>>7187543
This guy is a professor at the university I want to go to and is in each research area I'm interested in. Time to find a different university.

[Anonymous No.7188172]

>>7188168
Why?

[Anonymous No.7188175]

>>7188163
I have to make an hexagonal diffraction grating for an IR laser. My idea is that the 'diameter' (a) of the hexagon is the same order of magnitude of the laser wavelength but I'm not sure about the space between hexagons (b) because I would like to maximize the amplitude of the first order diffraction maxima. Is there any software where I can simulate this type of grating?
In the picture, the white part would be the surface where the light is reflected and the black part, the one where nothing is reflected.

[Anonymous No.7188178]

pic related.

>>7188147
Never read it. How is it (difficulty, topics) compared to say, Reif or Pathria?

[Anonymous No.7188208]

>>7188178

I first approached Stat Mech from Reif, and found it to be a bit unsatisfying. I've never looked at Pathria.

Generally speaking, it's less a text for self-learning, like Reif, and more of a reference. My work focuses about molecular simulations and my background is in chemistry, and I've noticed that virtually all other other theory and computation people in Chemistry have McQuarrie, so it may be a "bible" more for people in my field and not in statistical mechanics itself.

[Anonymous No.7188212]

>>7187600
>actually liking python

[Anonymous No.7188216]

>>7188212

Welcome to the future.

[Anonymous No.7188227]

>>7188212

> "Computer Science"

[Anonymous No.7188232]

>>7188216

>2 compsci students debate on how to optimize code
>the first one starts refactoring code into structures and reformatting syntax
>the second one giggles
>the first one, in ignorance and stupidity, smirks as he assumes the second one knows nothing about programming

[Anonymous No.7188233]

>>7188175
I'm not sure what the purpose of the grating would be so it's hard to say what you need.

by "first order" do you mean the +1 and -1 orders? In a diffraction grating like yours the diffraction pattern would be 2-d and there would be 6 first order maxima corresponding to the six slits.
If the grating features are on the order of the wavelength and repeat for an entire 2-d aperture that can fit a beam, the diffraction pattern will just be a huge series of overlapping hexagons.

There are software packages like Zemax and CodeV that can simulate DOEs but they are very expensive. You can also try simulating it in matlab with beam propagation method, but I still don't understand what you would want to do with this.

Is this for beam shaping or something? Is this a reflective element (a bunch of hexagonal mirrors with insulating/non-reflective boundaries)? If so you have to add a blazed grating in addition for there to be refracted orders, otherwise you're just dealing with the case of multiple beam interference

[Anonymous No.7188234]

>>7188212
man python is a scientist's best friend. all those libraries
>numpy
>scipy
>matpotlib
>pandas
>sympy
>all the scikits
>biopython

[Anonymous No.7188240]

>>7188234
you are so pathetic it hurts

Im what you call an actual Compscientist,
and I work as a database engineer for google

everytime I hear python, and these lame ass libraries, its the equivalent of someone saying:

"Man I love programming, I learned excel the other day"

[Anonymous No.7188243]

>>7187600
I like Zed Shaw's approach to teaching and I think it's awesome that he puts the source code to his books up on github. It's cool stuff too. He writes his books using a combination of LaTeX, restructured text,a couple of other tools, and then he ties it all together with Dexy. It's kind of brilliant.

[Anonymous No.7188256]

>>7188240
google uses python extensively

[Anonymous No.7188260]

>>7188240

You know most people here are just people who -use- computers. Scientists often do not have time to just fuck around all day optimizing code and writing new math functions when there are pre-mades that work and have been implemented in python.

This is often not even for any seriously heavy work, but for analyzing data, so efficiency is often not even that important.

[Anonymous No.7188263]

>>7188234
you forgot
>slow

[Anonymous No.7188265]

>>7188240
I know, right? What a bunch of scrubs. I can't believe those clowns would rather use tools that already exist when they could build them all over again in C. I bet they don't even shit all over other people's language choices because they don't give a shit how others solve their own problems.

What a bunch of peasants.

[Anonymous No.7188269]

>>7188256
>I speak english
>Feynman speaks english

I am feynman

[Anonymous No.7188273]

>>7188265
>so scrub that he doesnt even understand computers

>thinks c++/c is what Im talking about vs python and "modern languages"

>only knowledge of computers and languages comes literally from pop-sci equivalent

[Anonymous No.7188274]

This I guess.

>>7188240
>database engineer
>comp scientist
Why did you go out of your way to discredit yourself with your own post? You're what we call a "code monkey"

[Anonymous No.7188300]

>>7188273
You're probably the kind of dude who actually has an opinion about "gamer girls."

You're the type of dude to get angry in a mac-microsoft debate and then not shut the fuck up about Linux.

I bet you freak out when your mom cuts your fishsticks in half instead of quarters.

[Anonymous No.7188301]

>>7188273
>thinks c++/c is what Im talking about vs python and "modern languages"
so which functional language do you masturbate to, haskell?

[Anonymous No.7188304]

>>7188301
>>7188301
>>7188301
>>7188300

[Anonymous No.7188313]

About halfway through a graduate course that covers this book. I'm really liking it so far.

I've heard Kolb & Turner mentioned as another bible for particle cosmologists.

[Anonymous No.7188316]

Perry's chemical enginering handbook is the bible for us,
Filled with useful data.

[Anonymous No.7188337]

>>7188316

I was between Perry's or BSL.
Can I choose both?

[Anonymous No.7188348]

>>7188208
thanks for the info.

>and found it to be a bit unsatisfying
Care to explain?

[Anonymous No.7188395]

>>7188172
because it might mean I have to work with his theories

[Anonymous No.7188404]

>>7187723
the yellow book is full of errors, stay with EGA like>>7187982

[Anonymous No.7188412]

>>7188036
Im sorry

[Anonymous No.7188419]

>>7188404
>>7187982
Are you guys algebraic geometers? Because I agree that EGA is probably the closest to a "Bible" for this style of algebraic geometry, but Hartshorne is still a great textbook, especially considering how huge EGA is.

And it simply isn't true that Hartshorne is "full of errors." It's not bad at all when it come to errors. Yes, parts of hartshorne are like EGA lite, but I don't find the two to be really comparable in their uses. Every algebraic geometer I know has used both.

[Anonymous No.7188590]

>>7188147
Quantum Chemistry?

[Anonymous No.7188597]

This little thing right here, it's actually a nice book, I've read most of it.

[Anonymous No.7188620]

>>7187491
Walter Feit "The Representation Theory of Finite Groups"

Curtis & Reiner "Representation Theory of Finite Groups and Associative Algebras"

Huppert "Character Theory of Finite Groups"

those cover the classical results, there's no real bible for the modern stuff yet.

>>7187723
poor you

[Anonymous No.7188652]

>>7188419
>And it simply isn't true that Hartshorne is "full of errors." It's not bad at all when it come to errors. Yes, parts of hartshorne are like EGA lite, but I don't find the two to be really comparable in their uses. Every algebraic geometer I know has used both.
I meant that the errata is really long, unusuallly long :)

[Anonymous No.7188656]

>>7187491
>the "bible"

Math and science don't have fairy tale books. We prefer the truth.

[Anonymous No.7188658]

>>7188168
Dont listen to the faggots here, he knows a lot more than the faggots complaining about him.
I would be glad to have him as my prof.

Actually, I want to punch the people talking shit about him.

[Anonymous No.7188665]

>>7188658
He's an ideologically blinded crackpot, so whatever he once knew or researched is now overshadowed by his bad reputation. Just like most people would reject a math lecture from Ted Kaczynski.

[Anonymous No.7188673]

>>7188665
at least it doesn't seem like he forces his views on his students or anyone really

[Anonymous No.7188676]

>>7188673
> Olver
this book is relevant to my interests (QFT)
how accessible? what's a good background for it?

[Anonymous No.7188692]

>>7188676
if you're comfortable with how vector fields on abstract manifolds work, then i'd say go for it.
any knowledge of differential geometry and analytical mechanics will help, and obviously some Lie theory.

[Anonymous No.7188694]

>>7188692
thanks
i've gone through Lee's smooth manifolds, so i'm pretty good with differential geometry. but isn't there stuff about jets and such in there?

for lie theory, stuff like lie algebras and roots and all that isn't needed, right?

[Anonymous No.7188743]

>>7188694
jets aren't used too much, you can learn it all when it's introduced. the stuff in Lee should be enough Lie theory.
Lee seems like a good background for it actually, the first chapter practically being a summary of Lee.

[Anonymous No.7188747]

>>7188743
thanks man, i'll tackle it this summer. really seems like i might learn some powerful stuff.

are you a PDE theory guy?

[Anonymous No.7188751]

>>7188747
no problem, good luck. it really is an interesting and powerful theory.
primarily, yeah.

[Anonymous No.7188866]

>>7187566
It's about time we did something about symmetry...

[Anonymous No.7188882]

>>7187600
>MFW that the hard way is the selling point.

Doing stuff the hard way does not necessarily mean you're gonna have a better understanding of it by the end of it.

If I wanted to learn Python *really* hard way surely I'd just not buy the book?

[Anonymous No.7188912]

>>7187491
referring other than The Holy Bible as "bible" is profanity

[Anonymous No.7188919]

>>7188912
Nobody cares about your stupid opinion. What are you going to do, start a crusade or something? Faggot.

[Anonymous No.7188927]

[Anonymous No.7188940]

>>7188912
>Bible
>Literally just Latin for book.

[Anonymous No.7189034]

>>7187491
That is what Moïse truly found that day

[Anonymous No.7189414]

>>7188041

This!!

[Anonymous No.7189419]

>>7188673
Excellent.

>>7188676
It's about as accessible as it can be. Necessary background is all in there for you.

[Anonymous No.7189421]

>>7188240
>I work as a database engineer for google
Google has been using python for at least 15 years.

[Anonymous No.7189422]

>>7188316
my nigger

great book, care to share any other book recommendations?

[Anonymous No.7189426]

>>7189421
>>7188269

[Anonymous No.7189431]

>>7189426
It's not the same logical fallacy.

If he was a database engineer at google, he would be intimately familiar with Python as it is used extensively as part of the backend, and therefore he would address the faults with the language and not offhandedly dismiss it as something other people use with its "lame libraries".

pic semi-related

[Anonymous No.7189438]

>>7188240

As much as I despise programming with python I don't see why its wrong to use it to glue together code using various optimalized libraries like scipy etc.

[Anonymous No.7189443]

>>7189431
I'm not that guy but doing any sort of database design or management with python sounds retarded as fuck. Google has their own system for managing big data. I don't know if it uses hadoop or some nosql technologies but it is way faster than many other things at that scale and most other fast technologies like Maria dB use C and C++ not shit tier python.

[Anonymous No.7189445]

>>7189431
its a chinese meme board,
Im sure he has his own logical reasons
plenty of my hardcore programming friends
are all extremely biased in languages/computers/algos that they like
but this is not to say they are not knowledgeable with the ones they dont as well

[Anonymous No.7189464]

more symmetries ?

[Anonymous No.7189494]

>people arguing like it's only C vs Python
Who Racket/Scheme here?

[Anonymous No.7189683]

>>7189494
SBCL > all

[Anonymous No.7190279]

[Anonymous No.7191129]

[Anonymous No.7191420]

I'm an engineer

[Anonymous No.7191426]

>>7191420
The joke was obvious and yet noone decided to post it because it wasn't funny then and it isn't funny now that you've posted it.

Neck yourself m8.

[Anonymous No.7191466]

>>7191420
>>7191426

6/10 m8 made an engineer reply

[Anonymous No.7191477]

>>7188316
I never use it for data over say NIST when I have access though, some of it's predictive methods and design chapters are pretty useful, though Sinnott has better detail for most things, overall I'd say it's way overrated despite many of our profs calling it our "bible".

[Anonymous No.7191479]

>>7191426
It's not fun when it hurts you right?

[Anonymous No.7191525]

>>7187541
Are you a mathematician?

[Anonymous No.7191642]

>>7188212
>>7188216
>>7188227
>>7188232
>>7188240
>>7188269
>>7188274
>>7188300
>>7188301

Python is prefect for scientists and engineers who need to collaborate on large high level software because you need other people to understand your code.

If you want to optimize key functions that's what CS and proper programmers are for.


Stop being and elitist buttplug, Python is the most important language for STEM majors right now and will only become more imporant as general purposes computers have become cheaper than microprocessors, even for mass production and manufacturing purpose. Accept it and join the Python loveboat.

[Anonymous No.7191667]

>>7187491
Graduated just in time for oil crash
Any other alberta bros know this feel? ;-;

[Anonymous No.7191677]

>>7187491
obligatory since the year of lunar walk

[Anonymous No.7191721]

>>7187491
I'm utterly disturbed by the absence of medical scientists on /sci/.

[Anonymous No.7191765]

>>7191642
>Python is prefect for scientists and engineers who need to collaborate on large high level software because you need other people to understand your code.
People used to say this about Fortran....

Python, like Fortran, is for people who can't be assed to learn to program. They have a simple thing they want done, so they take the easiest route. And then, when they have the next thing, they already have rudimentary knowledge of one tool, so rather than investing the effort in getting the right tool for the new job, they warp the tool they have a bit. And then they masturbate on their toolbox, and invite all their friend to do the same.

[Anonymous No.7191909]

>>7188263
>numpy
>slow

http://stackoverflow.com/a/7614252

[Anonymous No.7191918]

>>7191721
And I am utterly disturbed by their existence.

[Anonymous No.7191919]

>>7191909

Especially not now with CUDA numpy. If you have a GPU that isn't balls you can kick major ass with numpy now.

[Anonymous No.7191922]

>>7191765
Says the java programmer.

[Anonymous No.7191931]

>>7191765
> can't be assed to learn to program
lol, i know plenty of people with CS degrees who use python.

[Anonymous No.7192016]

For scientific computation one physics or math guy who knows python will kick the ass of a roomful of cs code gurus who barely made it through calc 1.

[Anonymous No.7192362]

>>7191765
>people who can't be assed to learn to program
Yes, that's what I said. Are you retarded? We aren't all programmers, some of us have actual, valuable work to do and we don't always need to run our models on supercomputers.

[Anonymous No.7192368]

>>7191909
>testing linear algebra in numpy
obviously, everything uses the same optimized linear algebra packages

[Anonymous No.7192374]

>>7192016
kek

[Anonymous No.7192384]

i saved all these books. i'm going to read all of them. what will happen to me?

[Anonymous No.7192400]

>>7188178
GSW states in either the first or second chapters that objects of dimension >1 are nonsense in string theory...that book is fucking old as hell

[Anonymous No.7192411]

>>7190279
Can't believe it took this long for someone to post it.

[Anonymous No.7192417]

>>7192384
You realized that there isn't enough time or computational power between your ears to both provide for yourself and cram useless shit into yer head

[Anonymous No.7192538]

>>7192417
suck my dick nigga i'm gonna dream formulas.

[Anonymous No.7192808]

>>7191667
I'm originally from Alberta but I deliberately chose not to go into any O&G-related field for precisely this reason.

So no.

[Anonymous No.7192815]

>>7192384
I would be legit impressed. I'm pretty sure >>7192417 wasn't calling you dumb, he was just pointing out the facts.

[Anonymous No.7192846]

music is more important than science, if aliens exist. they will gaze upon our planet and try to determine if we are worth saving, and in the end, music will be our truly distinct accomplishment.

[Anonymous No.7193031]

>>7191765
>People used to say this about Fortran....
Because it used to be true for FORTRAN

In fact it still use, most of the scipy.optimize package etc. uses FORTRAN libraries.

[Anonymous No.7193035]

>>7191909
Nice thank you.

>>7191919
Also this.

[Anonymous No.7193036]

>>7191721
Medicine has nothing to do with /sci/ beyond the intro physio which makes some use of chemistry.

Medicine itself is neither science nor math and does not belong on /sci/.

[Anonymous No.7193040]

>>7192016
This. CS isn't even good at what they're supposed to be good at. I find that CEs are the best, balanced people to ask for computational advice.

[Anonymous No.7193041]

>>7191667
>A guide for the "nonengineering" professional

What the fuck? What "professional" working on water utilization isn't an engineer?

[Anonymous No.7193046]

>>7188656
>Report submitted! This window will close in 3 seconds...

[Anonymous No.7193049]

>>7193041

Management, they need to be explicitly told not the drink the murky water