/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #12273838

119KiB, 947x941, 1602830965532.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Physics for mathematicians

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 02:13:19 2020 No.12273838 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>12273865 >>12273920 >>12276148 >>12276288 >>12276703 >>12276728

What books are key to getting started learning physics with a rigorous approach?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 02:19:01 No.12273854 Report

Quoted By:

Linear algebra
Abstract algebra
Number theory
Statistics
Functional analysis
Complex analysis
Differential forms
Nonlinear dynamics and chaos theory
Ordinary differential equations
Partial differential equations
Homotopy principle
Variational calculus
Algebraic topology
Algebraic geometry

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 02:22:48 No.12273865 Report

Quoted By: >>12274838 >>12274846

>>12273838
You don't. Physics just makes shit up.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 02:45:07 No.12273920 Report

Quoted By:

>>12273838
Find a university's unit guide and select the first unit in their bachelor of science major in physics course then scroll down into the resources part and they should have some recommendations.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 12:18:41 No.12274838 Report

Quoted By:

>>12273865
OP what this guy said is correct. Just like math physics is based off logic and analysis meaning slot of the rules and terms we use to describe our universe are made up. You can also just read the handbook of physics

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 12:24:30 No.12274842 Report

Quoted By:

Rigorous physics is merely mathematics with rigorous physics.
If you want to learn physics and not spend 5 years just on one sub-subject, you must accept the fast-track.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 12:26:05 No.12274846 Report

Quoted By:

>>12273865
physics makes shit up in a way that it can predict the outcome of experiments, most of the times so well that even when approximating, if there is a disagreement between theory and experiment, the experimenters most likely fucked up.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 12:26:27 No.12274847 Report

Quoted By:

Rigorous physics is merely physics with rigorous mathematics.

If you had a book on physics that would take its time explaining the math used rigoriously, the book would natrually be at least as long as a math book - it would be a math book with many applied examples.
If you had a text that explains the physics while presuming all the mathematics, you'd probably also complain that it's not rigorous.

So if you want to learn physics and not spend 5 years just on one sub-subject, you must accept the fast-track.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 20:21:17 No.12276148 Report

Quoted By:

>>12273838
OpenStax

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 20:33:16 No.12276207 Report

Quoted By:

>reading books in 2020
>not just browsing PDFs on arxiv.org
>ngmi
for more mathematical papers
(ie, that build from axioms, and prove a Theorem)
start here:
https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.01826
https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.09821
https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.11412

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 20:54:55 No.12276288 Report

Quoted By:

>>12273838
Arnold's "Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics", Hall's "Quantum Theory for Mathematicians", and, if you already know a lot of math, Takthajan's "Quantum Mechanics for Mathematicians". For advanced stuff Dütsch's "From Classical Field Theory to Perturbative Quantum Field Theory" and Hamiltons "Mathematical Gauge Theory". Don't even try reading the two "Quantum Fields and Strings" books, they are not only badly written and hardly edited, but also completely useless if you do not already know everything.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 22:38:17 No.12276703 Report

Quoted By:

>>12273838
Spivak. Look for his physics for mathematicians book

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 22:47:25 No.12276728 Report

Quoted By: >>12277711

>>12273838
Fucking based geometers with their index soup and ricci tensor and Christoffel symbol hurricane

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2020 05:22:43 No.12277711 Report

Quoted By:

>>12276728
Only physicists use abstract index notation. I mean yes, if you actually want to calculate shit you need to use coordinates, but for mathematical development this is not really all that used.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches