How to study elementary physics?

[dolbygaba]

I'm sorry for my english, I'm working on solving this problem

 

My knowledge level in physics is about zero. There are a lot of books, what to choose? There are a lot of formulas in school course ( I count about 600 ), should I know them all and remember very well? And how to remember them?

 

May be you will ask, why I want to learn physics? In the future, I would like to work with soldering-iron, printed circuit boards, I want to know how to fix broken electrical appliances etc. On the other hand I want to write any very simple 2D games by using knowledge of classical mechanics.

Also, I would like to get acquainted with more complex things, like quantum mechanics etc.

After all, it is simply interesting and I want to know more about this world.

 

Why I still don't know physics? In school I was a bad pupil, not because I'm stupid, but because I was poorly motivated.

 

All that I know about physics is the fact that I need to know mathematics. I'm studying math right now.

 

So, I don't know where to start. I need your advices.

 

Thanks.

[DrRocket]

I'm sorry for my english, I'm working on solving this problem

 

My knowledge level in physics is about zero. There are a lot of books, what to choose? There are a lot of formulas in school course ( I count about 600 ), should I know them all and remember very well? And how to remember them?

 

May be you will ask, why I want to learn physics? In the future, I would like to work with soldering-iron, printed circuit boards, I want to know how to fix broken electrical appliances etc. On the other hand I want to write any very simple 2D games by using knowledge of classical mechanics.

Also, I would like to get acquainted with more complex things, like quantum mechanics etc.

After all, it is simply interesting and I want to know more about this world.

 

Why I still don't know physics? In school I was a bad pupil, not because I'm stupid, but because I was poorly motivated.

 

All that I know about physics is the fact that I need to know mathematics. I'm studying math right now.

 

So, I don't know where to start. I need your advices.

 

Thanks.

 

Curioiusity is the primary pre-requisite. You apparently are curious.

 

For a curious person with a willingness to work there is no better exposition of physics at a basic level than The Feynman Lectures on Physics by Feynman, Leighton and Sands. If one reads between the lines it is also very good for the more advanced student.

 

In that book (3 volumes) you will see physics through the eyes of one of the true masters of the subject. I doesn't get any better.

 

 

http://www.feynmanlectures.info/

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Feynman_Lectures_on_Physics

Edited February 13, 2012 by DrRocket

[rktpro]

Curioiusity is the primary pre-requisite. You apparently are curious.

 

For a curious person with a willingness to work there is no better exposition of physics at a basic level than The Feynman Lectures on Physics by Feynman, Leighton and Sands. If one reads between the lines it is also very good for the more advanced student.

 

In that book (3 volumes) you will see physics through the eyes of one of the true masters of the subject. I doesn't get any better.

 

 

http://www.feynmanlectures.info/

 

http://en.wikipedia....ures_on_Physics

 

Taking full advantage of the amazing lectures would be difficult for him in the beginning. He should first target for a strong base.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Six-Easy-Pieces-Essentials-Explained/dp/0201408252

 

http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/benjamin_crowell

[dolbygaba]

Thanks!

[Michael A. Gottlieb]

Taking full advantage of the amazing lectures would be difficult for him in the beginning. He should first target for a strong base.

 

That The Feynman Lectures on Physics (FLP) is unsuitable as a text for teaching beginners physics is a popular misconception, which you can read more about here. In fact, FLP was used for almost two decades as the textbook for the 2-yr introductory (freshmen and sophomore) physics course required of all students attending Caltech (regardless of major), most of whom had no background in physics nor any calculus before taking the FLP course at Caltech. The only real shortcoming of FLP as a physics textbook, in my opinion, is its lack of exercises; My colleagues and I are currently addressing that problem and hope to publish an exercise book for FLP later this year.

 

Michael A. Gottlieb

Editor, The Feynman Lectures on Physics

www.feynmanlectures.info

Edited February 18, 2012 by Michael A. Gottlieb

[DrRocket]

That The Feynman Lectures on Physics (FLP) is unsuitable as a text for teaching beginners physics is a popular misconception, which you can read more about here. In fact, FLP was used for almost two decades as the textbook for the 2-yr introductory (freshmen and sophomore) physics course required of all students attending Caltech (regardless of major), most of whom had no background in physics nor any calculus before taking the FLP course at Caltech. The only real shortcoming of FLP as a physics textbook, in my opinion, is its lack of exercises; My colleagues and I are currently addressing that problem and hope to publish an exercise book for FLP later this year.

 

Michael A. Gottlieb

Editor, The Feynman Lectures on Physics

www.feynmanlectures.info

 

That would be great.

 

To some extent that is addressed by Feynman's "Tips on Physics", but your exercise book would certainly be a valuable addition.

 

However, with or without an exercise book, the FLP remains one of the very best physics texts, at any level, ever published.

 

Thanks very much for maintaining and improving that masterpiece. Please raise your right hand, reach over your right shoulder, and pat yourself on the back. You deserve it.

 

BTW your link does not seem to be working.

Edited February 18, 2012 by DrRocket

[elfmotat]

That The Feynman Lectures on Physics (FLP) is unsuitable as a text for teaching beginners physics is a popular misconception, which you can read more about here. In fact, FLP was used for almost two decades as the textbook for the 2-yr introductory (freshmen and sophomore) physics course required of all students attending Caltech (regardless of major), most of whom had no background in physics nor any calculus before taking the FLP course at Caltech. The only real shortcoming of FLP as a physics textbook, in my opinion, is its lack of exercises; My colleagues and I are currently addressing that problem and hope to publish an exercise book for FLP later this year.

 

Michael A. Gottlieb

Editor, The Feynman Lectures on Physics

www.feynmanlectures.info

 

The link is broken. The actual link is here.

[Michael A. Gottlieb]

The link is broken. The actual link is here.

 

Thanks for fixing the broken link!

 

To some extent that is addressed by Feynman's "Tips on Physics", but your exercise book would certainly be a valuable addition.

Feynman's Tips on Physics (TIPS) includes about 80 exercises for chapters 1-20 of FLP Vol I. It's a nice collection of exercises (80 of my personal favorites, in fact - I selected them), but it isn't enough exercises, really, even to cover FLP Vol I chapters 1-20. The 1000 exercises in the new exercise book will include all the exercises in TIPS plus a lot more; We hope it will provide a sufficiently large collection of exercises for self-studying physics using FLP.

 

Thanks very much for maintaining and improving that masterpiece. Please raise your right hand, reach over your right shoulder, and pat yourself on the back. You deserve it.

Thanks for the kudos!

[DrRocket]

The link is broken. The actual link is here.

 

Thanks for finding a working link.

 

Reason #2 for not using the Feynman Lectures on Physics (the acronym does not do it justice), that physics teachers are averse to an apparent competition with Feynman, is, in my opinion, one of the best reasons for purchasing and reading that book, and should be a reason for using it in a class.

 

There are very few introductory texts, in any subject, written by a true master. I can think of no other such texts, suitable for freshmen, at the moment. The Feynman Lectures on Physics are a rather unique example.

 

What I have found to be the case, particularly with mathematics and physics books, is that books written by top-drawer scientists and mathematicians are the most clear and insightful. Unfortunately most such books are written at a very high level and are not accessible to the neophyte.

 

In the Feynman Lectures on Physics one finds nearly all of physics, at some level, viewed through the eyes of one of the most insightful and productive physicists of all time. Yet Feynman manages to communicate this insight with no advanced mathematics and assuming no previous background in physics. It is his incredible physical insight that allows him to explain so much with so little. Mark Kac was correct -- Feynman was a magician of the highest caliber.

 

Other introductory physics texts have undergone many revisions and new editions. The Feynman Lectures on Physics have been slightly improved, new illustrations made, digitized, and a very few small errors corrected, but the original text survives nearly as originally published -- there is a reason that classics are classics. Competing with Feynman is both silly and futile. But using Feynman to either enhance one's own understanding or to help one to explain the essence of physics to others is pretty smart. If you are going to steal, steal from the best.

[rktpro]

Thanks for finding a working link.

 

Reason #2 for not using the Feynman Lectures on Physics (the acronym does not do it justice), that physics teachers are averse to an apparent competition with Feynman, is, in my opinion, one of the best reasons for purchasing and reading that book, and should be a reason for using it in a class.

 

There are very few introductory texts, in any subject, written by a true master. I can think of no other such texts, suitable for freshmen, at the moment. The Feynman Lectures on Physics are a rather unique example.

 

What I have found to be the case, particularly with mathematics and physics books, is that books written by top-drawer scientists and mathematicians are the most clear and insightful. Unfortunately most such books are written at a very high level and are not accessible to the neophyte.

 

In the Feynman Lectures on Physics one finds nearly all of physics, at some level, viewed through the eyes of one of the most insightful and productive physicists of all time. Yet Feynman manages to communicate this insight with no advanced mathematics and assuming no previous background in physics. It is his incredible physical insight that allows him to explain so much with so little. Mark Kac was correct -- Feynman was a magician of the highest caliber.

 

Other introductory physics texts have undergone many revisions and new editions. The Feynman Lectures on Physics have been slightly improved, new illustrations made, digitized, and a very few small errors corrected, but the original text survives nearly as originally published -- there is a reason that classics are classics. Competing with Feynman is both silly and futile. But using Feynman to either enhance one's own understanding or to help one to explain the essence of physics to others is pretty smart. If you are going to steal, steal from the best.

 

 

Sir, IMHO, it is all about your background and what you want to do next. In many chapters things are well explained and sometimes a point is just touched. If you are someone who enjoys physics, you got the right book and if you want derivation for something or just problems to solve, you need to have other books too.

The lectures, no doubt, given by the most brilliant man. The only problem I found was that if you are self-studying you can't survive on that book only. It gives you the sight to experience a topic, but for the 'scenes' you need to have other books too.