Is this also a good physics book?

topsquark

Math Team
May 2013
2,530
1,050
The Astral plane
Why I ask is because it has a lot of equations in it with illustrations.

An example.



This book.

https://books.google.co.in/books?id=UjWTBQAAQBAJ

:ninja:
I couldn't get much information on this one. I am a bit skeptical, though, about any text that tries to combine science and religion. I would recommend any edition of "Tipler" and "Sears and Zemanski." They are both standard level for introductory Physics. ("Serway" is also good but I didn't look that one up.)

-Dan
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people

Benit13

Math Team
Apr 2014
2,166
739
Glasgow
Just looking at the text and its presentation, it looks like a student's homework. The type-setting is awful, the equations aren't properly labelled, the SI unit of Coulomb is C not Coul. (so there's an example of sloppy notation) and there are symbols used in the equations that are not specified in the text (although they might be specified in earlier pages instead).

However, with regards to the actual physics content posted, it looks mostly okay, but it is perhaps written a little bit amateurishly. Usually when you refer to other people's work you just state the facts/information/theories and then you reference the text using a tag (e.g. the Harvard style if the use the authors' names followed by a year, but some textbooks use index references instead, usually in square brackets or superscript). I would have thought that the author would reference the papers that were released by Thompson, Stoney, etc. or at least mention the publications. Also, the part on positrons just seems clunky... the author had an opportunity to explain about Dirac's work and how the theory had led to the hypothesis of an anti-electron, but the author instead just states some quick facts. Also, instead of listing the properties of the particles as equations in the text, it might have been better to have a big table of fundamental particles and their properties. That makes it easier for the reader to compare the different particles with each other and acts as a handy fact sheet when working through problems. Such a thing might exist in the book, but I suspect it's not if the properties are just written down in-line with the text.

So... on face value, it looks okay-ish... perhaps written a little sloppy, but it's not a drama.


However... never purchase a book that mixes physics and religion. The authors of such texts clearly write these books in order to legitimize their religion, not to actually educate students with the laws of physics and the experimental outcomes that provide the evidence that supports them.

Sears and Zemansky got me through the first year of University. It's an amazing book; the concepts are explained clearly and in detail and there's a massive set of problems to work through. The answers can be difficult to obtain, but if you get stuck on something you can always post it here :)

It's expensive, but it's totally worth the investment. Never settle for crappy textbooks because they're cheaper.

EDIT: that said, you can get the same edition of Sears and Zemansky that I bought about 14 years ago (tenth edition) for about £5! That's amazing. If you're really pushed for cash, that might be an option, but there's been a lot of progress over the past 10 - 15 years and it might still be worth investing in the newest edition to get the latest information.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
Jun 2017
65
3
India
Thanks for all the replies, suggestions and reviews .

The good thing i see in this books is that it is very noob friendly unlike some university textbooks.

I am going to buy this book soon because this Book looks like a nice documentary of history and physics .
The only physics book i have read other than my own physics textbook was the "Brief history of time" .


Even if you keep religion aside there is so much introductory physics materials in this book .Most of the university type text books are way more deeper .

This looks like a book even a child can enjoy reading
 
Feb 2016
1,849
657
.
Do you want to learn history or physics? It would be much more beneficial to study the subjects independent of each other .
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Dec 2012
850
310
Hong Kong
Do you want to learn history or physics? It would be much more beneficial to study the subjects independent of each other .
I think the 'history' is referring to the history of physics, but 'a nice documentary of history and physics' makes it sound more suitable as a pop sci reader than for academic study...
 

Benit13

Math Team
Apr 2014
2,166
739
Glasgow
The good thing i see in this books is that it is very noob friendly unlike some university textbooks.
Almost all university textbooks assume that you have studied physics at school, but they're also the most comprehensive when it comes to details. It might seem intimidating to learn physics from a an undergraduate university textbook, but the truth is that they're really pleasant books to read, especially if you get a colour copy (which you should!) and there won't be any awkward unstated knowledge gaps.

Think about it... do you think it's going to be easier to read a brand new book (only one edition) or a reputable book that's had at least ten editions?

I am going to buy this book soon because this Book looks like a nice documentary of history and physics .
Most undergraduate physics textbooks have historical mentions in them (after all, they need to specify the work that was conducted by the original scientists that lead to the conclusions you're reading about), so you won't need to worry about that. There's also specific books on the history of particular scientists and/or theories, so there is a great body of literature for it.

The only advantage you can get by purchasing the book you posted is to learn also about the Quran, which is a religious scripture that has nothing to contribute to physics.

The only physics book i have read other than my own physics textbook was the "Brief history of time" .
I'll be honest with you, I'm not a fan of the book. Stephen Hawking clearly has a lot of interesting ideas and is a very clever man, but that book's so painful to read for anyone who isn't clued up on the physics already that you'll probably get a lot more just reading a postgraduate textbook on relativity! It's impenetrable imho.

Even if you keep religion aside there is so much introductory physics materials in this book .Most of the university type text books are way more deeper .

This looks like a book even a child can enjoy reading
Well, whatever. I think a 14 year-old copy of "University Physics" by Sears and Zemansky is a superior text, but suit yourself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Feb 2016
1,849
657
.
I think the 'history' is referring to the history of physics, but 'a nice documentary of history and physics' makes it sound more suitable as a pop sci reader than for academic study...
Oh. Right. Still...