I have learned both _English and physics_ from this book! I began to study both volume 1 and volume 2 in my third year after primary school. When I started reading it, I only had a very rudimentary knowledge of English. I remember well how I made list of all the English words I didn't know. I looked them all up and began to memorize them. I picked up the grammar by just looking at the structures of the sentences. After having struggled through the first four chapters I needed to do this less and less, and could concentrate on the content of the books, without being bogged down learning English. At present, there is an 11th edition of this book, is practically identical with the 10th edition, which I now have. I worked through the two volumes of the second edition. Later I taught my brother physics from this book when he was getting low grades at high school. He passed it with 'flying colors', and became a biologist. Parallel to these books I studied Apostol's Calculus, both volumes, which was overkill for these books. Thanks to having worked through all the problems of this book I had an easy time when I began to study physics at the university of Leiden, The Netherlands. These books have given me a very thorough understanding of the very basics of physics.
@Cao Ha You mean: 'How did you learn the structure of the sentences to be able to translate correctly?' To begin with, my primary challenge was just to understand what was written. So, I didn't need to translate from Dutch to English, but just from English to Dutch, which is a lot easier! This is something I found out when I began to learn German, which I find easy to understand, but hard to express myself in. Still, I _did learn_ to generate English, as you can see from this text. But that was a gradual process. Here, in The Netherlands, we were exposed to a lot of English by television. Contrary to Germany and other countries around us, we cold watch television and heard spoken English, while at the same time we could see what was said in Dutch in the subtitles. Being exposed to a lot of movies and television series and hearing spoken English, virtuallly all Dutch people have acquired such a command over the English language, that it has become a second language here. And that had helped me a lot! So, just like childs learn their mother's language by pure exposure, all of us here in The Netherlands learn English by just raw and frequent exposure.
@Forest Edge Having learned English in this way has resulted in a very peculiar side effect. When you learn a foreign language, you can reach what is called the C2 level. This is a level whereby you can understand not only the literal meaning, but also the connotations of a language. For example, if somebody says: 'this person has Oedipal tendencies', you must know first of all the Greek story of Oedipus from the Odyssey, an ancient classical Greek text. In that story, Oedipus killed his father without knowing that it was his father. He also married his mother not knowing that this woman was his mother. To understand the full meaning of 'Oedipal' you must then know, that Sigmund Freud theorized, that every boy goes through a phase whereby he falls a little in love with his own mother, and becomes jealous of his father. A phase, in which Freud says that you can remain 'stuck'. And _that_ is the meaning _Freud_ gave to the term: 'Oedupal tendencies'. So there are several layers of understanding underneath the word: 'Oedipal'. My point is: if you go deep into a language, you can only get a really good grip on it if you reach the C2 level. But this C2 level can also be partial. And that happened to me having learned English from a textbook. I picked up not only the language, but also some of the 'culture' of physics, and how physicists think philosophically. In Leiden, there was a restaurant, especially for students. When I was with my friends, one of them invited a foreigner from America. I started to talk to him, and, much to the surprise of my friends, _and_ myself, I started to talk about subjects I normally didn't talk about. Without knowing it, there was in me a different 'person' whose thinking revolved around the philosophical base which had led to physics. Both this American and my friends were fascinated by the new subjects. And, later, when my friends joined me, (this American was not present then) they wanted to repeat this experience, and suggested that we should communicate in English again, because they wanted to know more about the new kinds of ideas I put forward.
Did not use Halliday and Resnick Vol 1, but did use Vol. 2 which was THE hardest class I took as an undergrad. I was very, very fortunate however because a friend of mine who took the class before me had a TA who "published" a volume for his students with EVERY assigned problem from the text solved in detail by hand. It was better than an answer key. My friend lent me the spiral bound book, and I assiduously taught myself electromagnetism using the TA's solutions. It was a big class of over 100 students where the exams averaged in the 30s, yet I made high 90s on every test. By the end of the semester, I had worked so hard and had such a thorough understanding of Halliday and Resnick Vol. 2 (thanks to that TA's solutions) that I went out and bought Vol. 1 because for the first time in my life everything in a textbook made sense.
I purchased this book last month. The first copy that I received was in "interesting" condition. Someone had spray painted the edges of the pages gold. Opening the book showed where most of the pages had been carved out so as to hide a flask. The merchant was very apologetic and immediately refunded the purchase price. Luckily, it wasn't too difficult to find another copy in much better condition.
Halliday, Resnick and Walker .. a Classic. Finally you enter onto good Physics books. Good review. And yes more Physics Book would be welcomed a lot! Also remember Sorcerer :) Physicists and Engineers are the main "Customers" of Math ... (true) ..so it is appropriate to have some Physics Book reviews.
I remember using the old editions of Vol I and II That had solid blue covers and probably no color pictures. That was followed by Quantum Physics of Atoms, Molecules, Solids, Nuclei, and Particles. This last book in their series has not changed much in its second edition. I liked it because instead of just giving us the Schrodinger Equation it showed how it evolved from classical mechanics , new physics such as de Broglie relationship, and provided a stepwise mathematical solution rather than just stating what the solution was. I never liked skipping the details but didn't mind if some obvious steps were left out.
Although many introductory physics books, and quantum mechanics books in particular, give out "derivations" of the Schrodinger equation based on classical mechanics, it is worth noting that the Schrodinger equation cannot be derived from Classical mechanics and the "derivations" that these books give out are at best incomplete. As a matter of fact, no one till date has derived the Schrodinger equation from any fundamental law of physics. In his original series of papers published in Annalen der physik, Schrodinger himself did not give any "derivation" of the equation from a fundamental law of physics but instead used some heuristic arguments, some of which were even false. Then he proceeded to apply the equation to the hydrogen atom. I doubt even Schrodinger knew how his equation worked out so well for describing all quantum-mechanical systems of interest.
Heh. Yes! That's the exact book I'm using, albeit a different version. Mine is the Sixth Edition, "Extended" version. I decided to start working through it because Physics was my First True Love before I discovered Computer Science anyway. And now that I'm on this journey of math (re)discovery I thought it would be beneficial (and fun!) to work on something that applies the math I'm studying. It's sort of a way of helping to motivate myself and stay inspired. Plus I just like Physics. The original plan was to major in Physics in school, but then I fell in love with computers and switched to C.S. Now, 25+ years later, it's fun to go back and dive into Physics again.
I think the best thing about you is that you go through the content pages thoroughly so that the person who wants to buy the book, gets a very clear idea as to what he or she is going to get. Love 💖 and Respect 🙏🏼 from India 🇮🇳.
I have the 3rd edition from 1977 when I was a freshman at RPI. It was published in two volumes. The honors physics students also used the Feynman Lectures as a reference. Our physics labs were most ingenious. I remember my first lab used a flat cylindrical plexiglass chamber lined with carbon paper. On one part of the chamber was a bb gun mounted so that it could slide side to side. In the center of the chamber was a target that could be circular, elliptical or a polygon. Firing the bb gun at the target would cause the bb to rebound and hit the chamber wall which would be recorded by the carbon paper. After numerous shots made at various transverse locations, the objective was to use the pattern of impacts recorded on the carbon paper to infer the shape and dimensions of the target. And you had to derive the equations you used and determine the uncertainties in your result. This was an obvious simulation of Rutherford’s experiment firing alpha particles at nuclei. I like the 3rd edition of the book because it does not have glossy color pictures and is pretty compact and gets to the point. My room mate had Resnick for his recitation professor. Resnick was an approachable and pretty down to earth guy.
Yeah this was the standard for a while, not sure if still is since I think some of the authors have died. I used the 7th edition of this book for fall semester 2005, my first semester in college. This brings back memories, lol. I remember thinking this class was hard when I took it but quickly found out this was nothing compared to what would follow as a physics and math major. After a year with this and it's corresponding lab we had our modern physics course with "Modern Physics" by Serway for a semester, followed up by a year of E&M using Griffiths "Introduction to Electrodynamics," a year of classical mechanics with "Mechanics" by Symon which was already out of print in the mid 2000's when we used it for our class, a year of quantum with Griffiths "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics," and a semester of thermodynamics with "Classical and Statistical Thermodynamics" by Carter which is also out of print now, and our experimental physics and computational physics labs were one semester each with textbooks made by our physics dept. That was the core that every physics major had to complete, we had physics electives too, I went with a year of astronomy and astrophysics using "Introduction to Modern Astrophysics" by Carrol and Ostile which we called B.O.B. (short for the Big Orange Book), for those that took the "night" lab where we set up with telescopes and did things like measure the angle of separation of suspected n-ary star systems with a bifillar micrometer or setup CCD/CMOS cameras to take pictures of something we had these manuals created by the professor.
Thanks. I think it's always useful to get the instructor's manual or teacher's edition of textbooks if you are studying alone. I'd forgotten about that.
The beef I have with this book is that it's extremely basic (for physics majors). This was the forced change when at my Undergrad institution programs were cut from five years to four years, and three physics basic courses had to be packed into two (i.e., three semesters of physics courses had to be taught in two semesters). Not the fault of the authors, because book companies and deals, but if you really want a good book: Giancoli Physics (either algebra or calculus based). Even an older edition will do.
1:32 If a is zero its not a quadratic polynomial anymore. Formula is defined for a quadratic polynomial so it is understood a≠0 I guess things go this way
I have the old Extended 3rd Ed of Halliday and Resnick(No Walker), an all in one that is like a phone book, I was lucky to also pick up the associated study guide. I think this book and Giancoli are the two dominant physics text books. I'd probably rate Halliday and Resnick slightly better for self-study, but the difference is marginal. For me it's quite interesting, some people feel they need the math before they study physics, but I found the reverse in that the study the physics greatly helped me retain and understand the math.
yoooooo its the best , I used it for most courses first 3 semester and its a great reference to refresh on topics, the math in it is not the most advanced like the Griffiths's, but its solid , I like your math books reviews, please do more physics in the future !
I love your enthusiasm for books, perhaps you should do a video on it at some point, esp as much of learning in online now. As an older guy, I love the feel and character of a book.. my pet hate though is that traditionally .. only the odd answers are given.. how odd is that lol . I hope you are well.
If a person is learning physics using Halliday, Resnick, and Walker, they are no longer doing "self-study". They are learning from HR&W. In particular, students should understand that about 10x the effort and time was put in to produce the textbook as the student will spend learning from it. It is worth getting away from the arrogance of hyper-individualism. We learn together, rather than in isolation. Unless a student sits down with a blank pad of paper and creates the entire subject on their own.
I would say that this book belongs to the all-inclusive style textbooks that fit into AP Physics level. For deeper understanding at college level I'd go to topic specialized books like Taylor or Goldstein for Mechanics , Griffiths, Marion or Jackson for Electrodynamics, etc. Among the all-inclusive textbooks I'd say that Halliday/Resnick is the winner, which you can complement with the Feynman Lectures for conceptual study
I have the 4 part soft cover enhanced problems version and WOW it's amazing. I haven't had time to work through the whole thing since I'm saving it for when I a tally do physics next year, but it was hard not to get into, it's so well des8gned
Sometimes I used this book to study when I was an engineering student in the end of the 90s and the beginning of the 2000s. Apart from this, I used and owned the text by Gettys, Keller and Skove: Classical and Modern Physics. Other really good textbooks: Serway, Tipler & Mosca, Schaum's "College Physics" (by Bueche & Hecht).
2 months ago i purchased the book a synopsis of elementary results in pure and applied mathematics, using your refferal link. I think I will also purchase this book 👍
Glad to see physics books covered. Would love to see a video aimmed at physics majors/grads for learning more theoretical math, for people who can do hard math, but used to it in a very informal manner like in physics. Also, check out Fundamentals of Physics by Shankar. New books, but very cheap and by a famous professor and writer.
I once TAed for this text. Self-study was mandatory. The tests were material and problems not covered in class or as homework (no odd numbered problems). Welcome to a GA Tech weed-out course. (:
The mathematics “Nobel” 7:25 is called the Fields medal, and considered more prestigious since it must be earned before your 40th birthday, whereas the Nobel is awarded at any age.
A classic text! I used the old 1966 edition (blue cover) from the library along with the Serway text required for university physics during my undergrad a little over a decade ago. It helped a lot with self study and I wound up getting an A for the course. My favorite physics text at this level is three volume set “Fundamental University Physics” by Alonso and Finn. Great review!
That's an interesting method - to use a primary and supplementary book in a course or just in study. There's a lot of merit to this, but students often just see it as "twice the work" since they're conditioned to measure learning in "seat time" and books as "time to read" time.
That’s a great review on a physics book! I got a massive university physics book by Young and Freedman and it has uni physics 1-3. I dont need to learn uni physics 3 but im taking my first engineering courses and they have the same feel like a engineering statics/dynamics book or a solid mechanics book. Lots of words and explanations. I like Hibbler for those three engineering textbooks.
I have the green and yellow third edition of this book, both part 1 and part 2. A copy of the green and yellow third edition can be seen in the bookcase behind the sofa in the TV series "The Big Bang Theory".
-3x (1-x) -3x + (1) + (-3x) (-x) -3x + (+3) (x) (+x) -3x + 3x (Exponent of 2) Why does the negative 3 turn into a positive 3? This is for multiplying different polynomials within algebra.
Red this book and used it to pass the exam at my university. There's another book similari as approach which is "principles of physics" by Serway and Jewet
This is a good book for people who need physics knowledge but aren't going to become physicists. I had this for my Engineering course, and it set me up well for later subjects.
I have this one but I find the Serway and Jewett's Principles of Physics textbooks to be easier readers. It was recommended by Dermot O'Reilly who also has a great TH-cam channel. The text I used for my Physics I and II classes was the Randall Knight book which I really liked for the organization, worked examples, and chapter summaries. I would definitely be interested to know what other Physics books you like!
The Theoretical Minimum by Leonard Susskind is also a great book for physics self-study; I'm pretty sure it was written with that intention too. Fundamentals of Physics: Mechanics, Relativity, and Thermodynamics by Dr. Ramamurti Shankar is also amazing.
I have this book for my general mechanics, electrodynamics, and other physics topics and based on my experience this is the best book that introduced me to physics. (I used the 10th edition)
Hello Sir, I have these books in two parts and the writers are Halliday, Resnick and Krane. Fifth edition. And the depth and explanations are awesome. Why the publisher remove the writer "Krane" now? Thanks for reviewing this book.
I have my original from college in 1984, combined third edition. Legendary, and quite readable, I think. The cover is green with more of an oscilloscope pattern. Inside covers have physical constants instead of formulas.
One day I will go back to university to study Physics. My high school physics teacher was amazing and inspired me to become a teacher. I ended up doing IT and now teach high school computer science but long to teach physics.
Yes, shame they got rid of derivations and historical backgrounds in newer editions (including the 5th edition) the third edition is the edition which the book got its glory from.
Your study technique is very similar to mine. I prefer textbooks not TH-cam videos where I slowly read sentence by sentence and paraphrase the information well and do the problems. I later return the book to my university library when I have taken extensive notes on the chapters I want to study. However, do you suggest trying to paraphrase without looking at the book because this will seem to take longer
Is the latest 12th edition really only available in "loose leaf" binding? So much for keeping your textbooks through adulthood. 😢 Probably worth it for practical use during college, and similarly glad to see positive reviews for the Kindle edition. But it's a sacrifice, and one that seems designed in part to eliminate the secondary market.
This book is studied by many serious high school (11th and 12 th grade) students in India, especially those who prepare for enginerring entrance tests. But it’s a highly readable book for anyone who wishes to enjoy physics.
In Brazil we have the Moysés Herch Nussenzveig. The book cover is also nice and in BR we prefer Nussenzveig than Halliday. Unfortunately I don't know if his piece of it was translated. RIP Nussenzveig.
@The Math Sorcerer, I'm a pure math major who graduated last year, and chanced upon quantum mechanics and became completely obsessed with it. The problem is I've never taken physics in my life (except a passing aquaintance with physics in Calculus IV). I'm going to grad school this fall for mathematical finance, but I can't shake the quantum obsession :'). I know this is a open-ended question, but how would I best bring myself up to speed on physics required to securely study quantum mechanics at the graduate level and beyond?
A legendary British Physics textbook is called "A-level Physics" by Roger Muncaster. Don't let the title put you off. It's a solid (literally and figuratively) book packed with good physics knowledge.
Sir, Physics is good, I used to wonder awhile ago, years back then, that what is the different between these subjects maths and physics and until recently I started understanding, that it is the studying physical phenomenons. And understanding of how, need deep knowledge of mathematics. Thanks, it my favourite book until I realised, I need a lot mathematics in order to holdled friendly manner but yeah am interested in Electrical Engineering and it still fabulous favourite book i cannot let go off in my mind!
Halliday and Resnik was the book we used in the early 70's. There was an orange version which was used by the Engineering and Science majors and the Physics majors used the larger blue version. An interesting modern physics book is "Modern Classical Physics" by Kip Thorne and Roger Blandford. It's essentially an expansion of topics from their well known "Gravitation" book. They call it a geometric approach to the topic meaning they rely heavily on tensor calculus, "independent of any coordinate system". I would be interested in your take on self learning tensor calculus.
the best basic physics book i have ever read is the Moysés Nusenzveig's book "Curso de Física Básica", it's a brazilian book and i think it's the best.
I just started to read the digital 10th edition by halliday resnick. I wish I had read this book when I was a student instead of the spanish 11th edition by sears zemansky.
Well The Walker version might be good but the Resnick Halliday Krane version is just anither level. It’s becomes very addicting to read even for someone who has very little interest in physics.
Am digging this gradual expanding of scope from the Math Sorcerer to the Quant Sorcerer 😎 What's next? The physics of computer game engines? The math behind electoral polling? You know we would watch it. Let's do it!
I have learned both _English and physics_ from this book!
I began to study both volume 1 and volume 2 in my third year after primary school. When I started reading it, I only had a very rudimentary knowledge of English.
I remember well how I made list of all the English words I didn't know. I looked them all up and began to memorize them. I picked up the grammar by just looking at the structures of the sentences.
After having struggled through the first four chapters I needed to do this less and less, and could concentrate on the content of the books, without being bogged down learning English.
At present, there is an 11th edition of this book, is practically identical with the 10th edition, which I now have.
I worked through the two volumes of the second edition. Later I taught my brother physics from this book when he was getting low grades at high school. He passed it with 'flying colors', and became a biologist.
Parallel to these books I studied Apostol's Calculus, both volumes, which was overkill for these books.
Thanks to having worked through all the problems of this book I had an easy time when I began to study physics at the university of Leiden, The Netherlands. These books have given me a very thorough understanding of the very basics of physics.
That's impressive!
Great comment
Great story! You've inspired me.
@Cao Ha
You mean: 'How did you learn the structure of the sentences to be able to translate correctly?'
To begin with, my primary challenge was just to understand what was written. So, I didn't need to translate from Dutch to English, but just from English to Dutch, which is a lot easier! This is something I found out when I began to learn German, which I find easy to understand, but hard to express myself in.
Still, I _did learn_ to generate English, as you can see from this text. But that was a gradual process.
Here, in The Netherlands, we were exposed to a lot of English by television. Contrary to Germany and other countries around us, we cold watch television and heard spoken English, while at the same time we could see what was said in Dutch in the subtitles.
Being exposed to a lot of movies and television series and hearing spoken English, virtuallly all Dutch people have acquired such a command over the English language, that it has become a second language here. And that had helped me a lot!
So, just like childs learn their mother's language by pure exposure, all of us here in The Netherlands learn English by just raw and frequent exposure.
@Forest Edge Having learned English in this way has resulted in a very peculiar side effect.
When you learn a foreign language, you can reach what is called the C2 level. This is a level whereby you can understand not only the literal meaning, but also the connotations of a language.
For example, if somebody says: 'this person has Oedipal tendencies', you must know first of all the Greek story of Oedipus from the Odyssey, an ancient classical Greek text. In that story, Oedipus killed his father without knowing that it was his father. He also married his mother not knowing that this woman was his mother.
To understand the full meaning of 'Oedipal' you must then know, that Sigmund Freud theorized, that every boy goes through a phase whereby he falls a little in love with his own mother, and becomes jealous of his father. A phase, in which Freud says that you can remain 'stuck'. And _that_ is the meaning _Freud_ gave to the term: 'Oedupal tendencies'. So there are several layers of understanding underneath the word: 'Oedipal'.
My point is: if you go deep into a language, you can only get a really good grip on it if you reach the C2 level. But this C2 level can also be partial. And that happened to me having learned English from a textbook. I picked up not only the language, but also some of the 'culture' of physics, and how physicists think philosophically.
In Leiden, there was a restaurant, especially for students. When I was with my friends, one of them invited a foreigner from America. I started to talk to him, and, much to the surprise of my friends, _and_ myself, I started to talk about subjects I normally didn't talk about.
Without knowing it, there was in me a different 'person' whose thinking revolved around the philosophical base which had led to physics.
Both this American and my friends were fascinated by the new subjects. And, later, when my friends joined me, (this American was not present then) they wanted to repeat this experience, and suggested that we should communicate in English again, because they wanted to know more about the new kinds of ideas I put forward.
Did not use Halliday and Resnick Vol 1, but did use Vol. 2 which was THE hardest class I took as an undergrad. I was very, very fortunate however because a friend of mine who took the class before me had a TA who "published" a volume for his students with EVERY assigned problem from the text solved in detail by hand. It was better than an answer key. My friend lent me the spiral bound book, and I assiduously taught myself electromagnetism using the TA's solutions. It was a big class of over 100 students where the exams averaged in the 30s, yet I made high 90s on every test. By the end of the semester, I had worked so hard and had such a thorough understanding of Halliday and Resnick Vol. 2 (thanks to that TA's solutions) that I went out and bought Vol. 1 because for the first time in my life everything in a textbook made sense.
Do you have still volume with explanations?
I purchased this book last month. The first copy that I received was in "interesting" condition. Someone had spray painted the edges of the pages gold. Opening the book showed where most of the pages had been carved out so as to hide a flask. The merchant was very apologetic and immediately refunded the purchase price. Luckily, it wasn't too difficult to find another copy in much better condition.
Cap
Flask was missing then? Successful course, I suppose.
Perhaps the owner was interested in the physics problem of how wrecked he could get on booze until his center of mass collided with the ground?
That's the contraband version.
Awesome purchase!
I am a physics final year student and this book was a game changer in highschool for me. The way he wrote the book is just amazing.
cool conan profile picture
You gotta love the photography in old Physics and Chemistry books.
Halliday, Resnick and Walker .. a Classic. Finally you enter onto good Physics books. Good review. And yes more Physics Book would be welcomed a lot! Also remember Sorcerer :) Physicists and Engineers are the main "Customers" of Math ... (true) ..so it is appropriate to have some Physics Book reviews.
I remember using the old editions of Vol I and II That had solid blue covers and probably no color pictures. That was followed by Quantum Physics of Atoms, Molecules, Solids, Nuclei, and Particles. This last book in their series has not changed much in its second edition. I liked it because instead of just giving us the Schrodinger Equation it showed how it evolved from classical mechanics , new physics such as de Broglie relationship, and provided a stepwise mathematical solution rather than just stating what the solution was. I never liked skipping the details but didn't mind if some obvious steps were left out.
Although many introductory physics books, and quantum mechanics books in particular, give out "derivations" of the Schrodinger equation based on classical mechanics, it is worth noting that the Schrodinger equation cannot be derived from Classical mechanics and the "derivations" that these books give out are at best incomplete. As a matter of fact, no one till date has derived the Schrodinger equation from any fundamental law of physics. In his original series of papers published in Annalen der physik, Schrodinger himself did not give any "derivation" of the equation from a fundamental law of physics but instead used some heuristic arguments, some of which were even false. Then he proceeded to apply the equation to the hydrogen atom. I doubt even Schrodinger knew how his equation worked out so well for describing all quantum-mechanical systems of interest.
Heh. Yes! That's the exact book I'm using, albeit a different version. Mine is the Sixth Edition, "Extended" version. I decided to start working through it because Physics was my First True Love before I discovered Computer Science anyway. And now that I'm on this journey of math (re)discovery I thought it would be beneficial (and fun!) to work on something that applies the math I'm studying. It's sort of a way of helping to motivate myself and stay inspired. Plus I just like Physics. The original plan was to major in Physics in school, but then I fell in love with computers and switched to C.S. Now, 25+ years later, it's fun to go back and dive into Physics again.
Walker was my physics professor. Such an amazing professor.
Krane >>>> Walker
I think the best thing about you is that you go through the content pages thoroughly so that the person who wants to buy the book, gets a very clear idea as to what he or she is going to get.
Love 💖 and Respect 🙏🏼 from India 🇮🇳.
please do more physics books, im really interested :D
I bought this one a few years ago. It's very thorough.
I have the 3rd edition from 1977 when I was a freshman at RPI. It was published in two volumes. The honors physics students also used the Feynman Lectures as a reference. Our physics labs were most ingenious. I remember my first lab used a flat cylindrical plexiglass chamber lined with carbon paper. On one part of the chamber was a bb gun mounted so that it could slide side to side. In the center of the chamber was a target that could be circular, elliptical or a polygon. Firing the bb gun at the target would cause the bb to rebound and hit the chamber wall which would be recorded by the carbon paper. After numerous shots made at various transverse locations, the objective was to use the pattern of impacts recorded on the carbon paper to infer the shape and dimensions of the target. And you had to derive the equations you used and determine the uncertainties in your result. This was an obvious simulation of Rutherford’s experiment firing alpha particles at nuclei.
I like the 3rd edition of the book because it does not have glossy color pictures and is pretty compact and gets to the point.
My room mate had Resnick for his recitation professor. Resnick was an approachable and pretty down to earth guy.
Yeah this was the standard for a while, not sure if still is since I think some of the authors have died. I used the 7th edition of this book for fall semester 2005, my first semester in college. This brings back memories, lol. I remember thinking this class was hard when I took it but quickly found out this was nothing compared to what would follow as a physics and math major.
After a year with this and it's corresponding lab we had our modern physics course with "Modern Physics" by Serway for a semester, followed up by a year of E&M using Griffiths "Introduction to Electrodynamics," a year of classical mechanics with "Mechanics" by Symon which was already out of print in the mid 2000's when we used it for our class, a year of quantum with Griffiths "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics," and a semester of thermodynamics with "Classical and Statistical Thermodynamics" by Carter which is also out of print now, and our experimental physics and computational physics labs were one semester each with textbooks made by our physics dept. That was the core that every physics major had to complete, we had physics electives too, I went with a year of astronomy and astrophysics using "Introduction to Modern Astrophysics" by Carrol and Ostile which we called B.O.B. (short for the Big Orange Book), for those that took the "night" lab where we set up with telescopes and did things like measure the angle of separation of suspected n-ary star systems with a bifillar micrometer or setup CCD/CMOS cameras to take pictures of something we had these manuals created by the professor.
I did many of my undergraduate courses with Walker himself. Fantastic book and fantastic professor and physicist
The Instructor's Manual is real gold.
Thanks. I think it's always useful to get the instructor's manual or teacher's edition of textbooks if you are studying alone. I'd forgotten about that.
Thank you! I have it on my reading list now, just after 'Structures - Or Why Things Don't Fall Down'.
The beef I have with this book is that it's extremely basic (for physics majors). This was the forced change when at my Undergrad institution programs were cut from five years to four years, and three physics basic courses had to be packed into two (i.e., three semesters of physics courses had to be taught in two semesters). Not the fault of the authors, because book companies and deals, but if you really want a good book: Giancoli Physics (either algebra or calculus based). Even an older edition will do.
Oh Giancoli Physics! I have that one too:)
This was my physics book back in college. I enjoyed all the explanations.
very nice!
It would be wonderful if you continue to introduce various physics books to us. Thank you!
1:32
If a is zero its not a quadratic polynomial anymore.
Formula is defined for a quadratic polynomial so it is understood a≠0
I guess things go this way
I have the old Extended 3rd Ed of Halliday and Resnick(No Walker), an all in one that is like a phone book, I was lucky to also pick up the associated study guide. I think this book and Giancoli are the two dominant physics text books. I'd probably rate Halliday and Resnick slightly better for self-study, but the difference is marginal.
For me it's quite interesting, some people feel they need the math before they study physics, but I found the reverse in that the study the physics greatly helped me retain and understand the math.
Was just thinking about physics textbooks today. It would be great to see more physics textbooks in the future!
yoooooo its the best , I used it for most courses first 3 semester and its a great reference to refresh on topics, the math in it is not the most advanced like the Griffiths's, but its solid , I like your math books reviews, please do more physics in the future !
I love your enthusiasm for books, perhaps you should do a video on it at some point, esp as much of learning in online now. As an older guy, I love the feel and character of a book.. my pet hate though is that traditionally .. only the odd answers are given.. how odd is that lol . I hope you are well.
TE AMOOOOOO. Muchas gracias por compartir este hermoso libro. Gracias bro. Adelante nunca pa"trás💪💪👊👊👌👌
If a person is learning physics using Halliday, Resnick, and Walker, they are no longer doing "self-study". They are learning from HR&W. In particular, students should understand that about 10x the effort and time was put in to produce the textbook as the student will spend learning from it. It is worth getting away from the arrogance of hyper-individualism. We learn together, rather than in isolation. Unless a student sits down with a blank pad of paper and creates the entire subject on their own.
I would say that this book belongs to the all-inclusive style textbooks that fit into AP Physics level. For deeper understanding at college level I'd go to topic specialized books like Taylor or Goldstein for Mechanics , Griffiths, Marion or Jackson for Electrodynamics, etc. Among the all-inclusive textbooks I'd say that Halliday/Resnick is the winner, which you can complement with the Feynman Lectures for conceptual study
I have the 4 part soft cover enhanced problems version and WOW it's amazing. I haven't had time to work through the whole thing since I'm saving it for when I a tally do physics next year, but it was hard not to get into, it's so well des8gned
Sometimes I used this book to study when I was an engineering student in the end of the 90s and the beginning of the 2000s. Apart from this, I used and owned the text by Gettys, Keller and Skove: Classical and Modern Physics. Other really good textbooks: Serway, Tipler & Mosca, Schaum's "College Physics" (by Bueche & Hecht).
Any tips those who interest of physics and what it like? Interest of learning the mechanics physics 1
I am currently working my way through an earlier version of this book that I got in 1976. The earlier versions do not have Jearl Walker as a coauthor.
2 months ago i purchased the book a synopsis of elementary results in pure and applied mathematics, using your refferal link. I think I will also purchase this book 👍
I really love your videos man. Just wanna express my appreciation
I bought a used 7th edition of this book for the '05-'06 academic year.
Glad to see physics books covered. Would love to see a video aimmed at physics majors/grads for learning more theoretical math, for people who can do hard math, but used to it in a very informal manner like in physics. Also, check out Fundamentals of Physics by Shankar. New books, but very cheap and by a famous professor and writer.
excellent choice. i did it first year in the 80s.
I once TAed for this text. Self-study was mandatory. The tests were material and problems not covered in class or as homework (no odd numbered problems). Welcome to a GA Tech weed-out course.
(:
Thanks a lot for this! Would love to see a look at Volume 2. I'm guessing Volume 2 will cover electromagnetism?
The mathematics “Nobel” 7:25 is called the Fields medal, and considered more prestigious since it must be earned before your 40th birthday, whereas the Nobel is awarded at any age.
This was an awesome book review of a classic on Physics. Please also review books on Quantum Physics. Thanks in advance!
A classic text! I used the old 1966 edition (blue cover) from the library along with the Serway text required for university physics during my undergrad a little over a decade ago. It helped a lot with self study and I wound up getting an A for the course. My favorite physics text at this level is three volume set “Fundamental University Physics” by Alonso and Finn. Great review!
That's an interesting method - to use a primary and supplementary book in a course or just in study. There's a lot of merit to this, but students often just see it as "twice the work" since they're conditioned to measure learning in "seat time" and books as "time to read" time.
A few months ago I bought the 6th edition at a used book store. The lightning on the cover is white against a red background. Cost was $10.
Please do a video for physics and chemistry as well like you did for math books for beginners to advanced
Resnick also has a fantastic quantum mechanics book.
That’s a great review on a physics book! I got a massive university physics book by Young and Freedman and it has uni physics 1-3. I dont need to learn uni physics 3 but im taking my first engineering courses and they have the same feel like a engineering statics/dynamics book or a solid mechanics book. Lots of words and explanations. I like Hibbler for those three engineering textbooks.
I have the green and yellow third edition of this book, both part 1 and part 2.
A copy of the green and yellow third edition can be seen in the bookcase behind the sofa in the TV series "The Big Bang Theory".
-3x (1-x)
-3x + (1) + (-3x) (-x)
-3x + (+3) (x) (+x)
-3x + 3x (Exponent of 2)
Why does the negative 3 turn into a positive 3? This is for multiplying different polynomials within algebra.
Reminds me of the book Gale had in breaking bad
Red this book and used it to pass the exam at my university.
There's another book similari as approach which is "principles of physics" by Serway and Jewet
My favourite is Physics by Halliday and Resnick
The original edition.
The one Krane is now editing?
This was my textbook, well, the one split into five softbound books. It was a great resource!
6:57 Bats see moths in total darkness by detecting their sound waves
Bats see moths in total Darkness by detecting the Reflected Sound They receive ... it's Sonar at work in nature.
This is a good book for people who need physics knowledge but aren't going to become physicists. I had this for my Engineering course, and it set me up well for later subjects.
I have this one but I find the Serway and Jewett's Principles of Physics textbooks to be easier readers. It was recommended by Dermot O'Reilly who also has a great TH-cam channel. The text I used for my Physics I and II classes was the Randall Knight book which I really liked for the organization, worked examples, and chapter summaries.
I would definitely be interested to know what other Physics books you like!
Thank you. Just bought it recently on your recommendation, and you're right; it's very reader friendly.
I used the extended fourth edition through my General Physics course in undergraduate. Went through the whole book.
This is one of the best book on physics ever written.
The Theoretical Minimum by Leonard Susskind is also a great book for physics self-study; I'm pretty sure it was written with that intention too. Fundamentals of Physics: Mechanics, Relativity, and Thermodynamics by Dr. Ramamurti Shankar is also amazing.
I really like the Shankar books. Very to the point.
@@Jason-bg7jcPlease reply🙏🙏 *fundamentals of physics by r. Shankar vol.1 and vol.2*
Are they good for beginners?
The cover of that book is awesome.
That cover is amazing! Very tempted to collect it.
I have this book for my general mechanics, electrodynamics, and other physics topics and based on my experience this is the best book that introduced me to physics. (I used the 10th edition)
For many years Jearl Walker used to write the famous column "The Amateur Scientist" that ran in Scientific American.
The book Halliday, Resnick, and Krane is better IMO, you should check it out. It's often recommended for physics olympiad prep due to its rigor.
Hello Sir, I have these books in two parts and the writers are Halliday, Resnick and Krane. Fifth edition. And the depth and explanations are awesome. Why the publisher remove the writer "Krane" now? Thanks for reviewing this book.
Unless he has passed away, and wasn't part of the new edition. That happens at times.
I have my original from college in 1984, combined third edition. Legendary, and quite readable, I think. The cover is green with more of an oscilloscope pattern. Inside covers have physical constants instead of formulas.
That’s the version I used in 1977 when I think it was first released. Mine is in two volumes.
Thank you sir❤
Thanks for the recommendation. I take it seriously when people like you recommend books even if I know about the books.
We used the big orange one for my high school physics course back in 1983/84.
Thank you very much sir
One day I will go back to university to study Physics. My high school physics teacher was amazing and inspired me to become a teacher. I ended up doing IT and now teach high school computer science but long to teach physics.
Yes, shame they got rid of derivations and historical backgrounds in newer editions (including the 5th edition) the third edition is the edition which the book got its glory from.
“The Final Theory: Rethinking Our Scientific Legacy “, Mark McCutcheon for proper physics.
What an amazing video of an amazing book!
Love it! Thank you!!
Your study technique is very similar to mine. I prefer textbooks not TH-cam videos where I slowly read sentence by sentence and paraphrase the information well and do the problems. I later return the book to my university library when I have taken extensive notes on the chapters I want to study. However, do you suggest trying to paraphrase without looking at the book because this will seem to take longer
Is the latest 12th edition really only available in "loose leaf" binding? So much for keeping your textbooks through adulthood. 😢 Probably worth it for practical use during college, and similarly glad to see positive reviews for the Kindle edition. But it's a sacrifice, and one that seems designed in part to eliminate the secondary market.
Oh I know I saw that about the latest edition, how weird right. I'm sure there is a hardcover somewhere.
This book is studied by many serious high school (11th and 12 th grade) students in India, especially those who prepare for enginerring entrance tests. But it’s a highly readable book for anyone who wishes to enjoy physics.
In Brazil we have the Moysés Herch Nussenzveig. The book cover is also nice and in BR we prefer Nussenzveig than Halliday. Unfortunately I don't know if his piece of it was translated.
RIP Nussenzveig.
The book “The Road to Reality” by Sir Roger Penrose might be good to??
@The Math Sorcerer, I'm a pure math major who graduated last year, and chanced upon quantum mechanics and became completely obsessed with it. The problem is I've never taken physics in my life (except a passing aquaintance with physics in Calculus IV). I'm going to grad school this fall for mathematical finance, but I can't shake the quantum obsession :'). I know this is a open-ended question, but how would I best bring myself up to speed on physics required to securely study quantum mechanics at the graduate level and beyond?
Sir very good book for us If take the classes online over it
A legendary British Physics textbook is called "A-level Physics" by Roger Muncaster. Don't let the title put you off. It's a solid (literally and figuratively) book packed with good physics knowledge.
Sir, Physics is good, I used to wonder awhile ago, years back then, that what is the different between these subjects maths and physics and until recently I started understanding, that it is the studying physical phenomenons. And understanding of how, need deep knowledge of mathematics. Thanks, it my favourite book until I realised, I need a lot mathematics in order to holdled friendly manner but yeah am interested in Electrical Engineering and it still fabulous favourite book i cannot let go off in my mind!
Halliday and Resnik was the book we used in the early 70's. There was an orange version which was used by the Engineering and Science majors and the Physics majors used the larger blue version. An interesting modern physics book is "Modern Classical Physics" by Kip Thorne and Roger Blandford. It's essentially an expansion of topics from their well known "Gravitation" book. They call it a geometric approach to the topic meaning they rely heavily on tensor calculus, "independent of any coordinate system". I would be interested in your take on self learning tensor calculus.
I actually have a copy of that original orange version
Just bought all volumes and like them so much.
Thanks, sir
You're welcome!
the best basic physics book i have ever read is the Moysés Nusenzveig's book "Curso de Física Básica", it's a brazilian book and i think it's the best.
Thanks for this love from BHARAT (INDIA)
Can't be a sorcerer without an understanding of physics!
I just started to read the digital 10th edition by halliday resnick. I wish I had read this book when I was a student instead of the spanish 11th edition by sears zemansky.
Check out Walker's "Flying Circus of Physics"; it is great fun!
Well The Walker version might be good but the Resnick Halliday Krane version is just anither level. It’s becomes very addicting to read even for someone who has very little interest in physics.
It's a good for grasping fundamental concepts.
Looks a lot like my Tipler physics book from the 80’s.
Would newer versions be better? I found the extended 7th edition really cheap.
Its a good starter but you need to switch if you want to go deep into the subject.
Great video MS. How does it compare to the serway and jewett book? I was thinking of buying the serway book soon.
No need to compare ... Buy both 😀
@The Math Sorcerer what do you think about The Feynman Lectures on Physics ?
Is it suitable for complete beginners? I’ve never studied physics, but I’m curious to learn about it
Am digging this gradual expanding of scope from the Math Sorcerer to the Quant Sorcerer 😎 What's next? The physics of computer game engines? The math behind electoral polling? You know we would watch it. Let's do it!
What math i need to know before read it?