19
$\begingroup$

I am a Masters student of math interested in physics. When I was an undergraduate, I took the introductory course of physics, but it is just slightly harder than high school physics course. To be precise, it just taught us how to use calculus in physics, without involving the higher knowledge of math such as manifold, PDE, abstract algebra and etc. By the way, the knowledge in that course is "discrete", the connections between fields of physics is omited.

My question is, what I should do to learn "real physics" by myself? What books or materials should I read?

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This has some good answers: mathoverflow.net/q/2917/167834. It only covers QM, though. This is more general: mathoverflow.net/q/51395/167834. $\endgroup$
    – Alessandro Della Corte
    Commented Sep 8, 2022 at 6:19
  • 9
    $\begingroup$ Be aware that there's a substantial difference between "real physics" as done by physicists (lots of experimental aspects which guide the reasoning, and non-rigorous calculations) and "physics for mathematicians" which takes care to mathematically justify each step but also usually has to simplify things, or can only consider special cases, to make some progress, and lags real physics by years or decades depending on the area. $\endgroup$
    – Thomas Sauvaget
    Commented Sep 8, 2022 at 6:49
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This webpage has lots of good pointers. I'd particularly recommend John Baez's advice and the Physics StackExchange list. $\endgroup$
    – Timothy Chow
    Commented Sep 8, 2022 at 15:28
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Start with the book Mathematical Physics: Classical Mechanics $\endgroup$
    – rfloc
    Commented Sep 8, 2022 at 19:59
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ Some of the suggestions here and in the links are more of an answer to "How does one learn the mathematics of physics devoid of physical intuition?" $\endgroup$
    – Tom Copeland
    Commented Sep 8, 2022 at 21:44

9 Answers 9

Reset to default
13
$\begingroup$

I can recommend Leonard Susskind's Theoretical Minimum:

A number of years ago I became aware of the large number of physics enthusiasts out there who have no venue to learn modern physics and cosmology. Fat advanced textbooks are not suitable to people who have no teacher to ask questions of, and the popular literature does not go deeply enough to satisfy these curious people. So I started a series of courses on modern physics at Stanford University where I am a professor of physics. The courses are specifically aimed at people who know, or once knew, a bit of algebra and calculus, but are more or less beginners.

The name "theoretical minimum" is a reference to the notoriously rigorous exam a student needed to pass in order to study with Lev Landau. See also this discussion.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
2
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Landau's "Theoretical minimum" was based on his own books, multi-volume "Course of theoretical physics" which is available in English translation. $\endgroup$
    – Alexandre Eremenko
    Commented Sep 9, 2022 at 1:27
  • $\begingroup$ @CarloBeenakker, I looked at the beginning of Susskind's Lect. 1 and perused Lect. 3 on Classical Mechanics. To begin with a dynamical systems, 'set theoretic' approach using the two sides of a coin as states of a system is just backasswards Zenoistic to me. As one of my favorite profs used to say in his Baltimore accent, "Ehhhh, forget the mathematics, let's look at the physics." Then he would argue what the governing equation should be from, e.g., looking at the physics at the extremes of parameters. Feynman approaches least action with physical intuition--Susskind, not so much. $\endgroup$
    – Tom Copeland
    Commented Sep 9, 2022 at 16:53
10
$\begingroup$

The Feynman lectures on physics would also be a suitable entry point.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ (feynmanlectures.caltech.edu) Hard to find a set of books that combine physical intuition and mathematics in introductory classical mechanics / dynamics, stat mech, electromagnetism, and quantum mechanics to the degree that Feynman did which is appropriate for someone familiar with basic calculus. $\endgroup$
    – Tom Copeland
    Commented Sep 8, 2022 at 22:17
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ Feynman's lectures can be somewhat irritating for a mathematician: he assumes absolutely no knowledge of mathematics, see for example his long and clumsy explanation of the exponential function:-) These are great lectures, but perhaps not "for mathematicians". $\endgroup$
    – Alexandre Eremenko
    Commented Sep 9, 2022 at 1:31
  • $\begingroup$ It seems Feynman's books are toooooo long to read. $\endgroup$
    – LZB
    Commented Sep 9, 2022 at 6:26
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @AlexandreEremenko I agree that Feynman's lectures are not "for mathematicians," but then again, I don't interpret the original question as necessarily asking for books "for mathematicians." I read it as primarily asking for how to study physics on one's own. A master's student in mathematics may not yet be locked into a mathematician's mindset. $\endgroup$
    – Timothy Chow
    Commented Sep 9, 2022 at 13:52
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Timoty Chow: I can only rely on my own experience. For the first time I read the first few volumes of Feynman lectures when I was a high school student. And even at that time I noticed that he tries to avoid using any mathematics. This feature (of these and other similar books) certainly did not please me. $\endgroup$
    – Alexandre Eremenko
    Commented Sep 9, 2022 at 17:02
9
$\begingroup$

I think it's not difficult to find physics books explicitly written for mathematicians. For instance, Takhtajan's "Quantum Mechanics for Mathematicians" or "General relativity for mathematicians" by Sachs and Wu.

But I personally think you should start by familiarizing with experimental physics. The classical "Atomic Physics" by Max Born can be a good read before anything more formal, for instance. Also, if you are interested in classical electrodynamics, I would recommend "Classical electricity and magnetism" (another old one, 1960s...), by Panofsky and Phillips, for similar reasons. The energy associated with the EM field, for instance, is treated with an experimental attitude which is useful, I believe, to have a better grasp on the physical meaning of energy conservation involving EM phenomena. Special relativity is also introduced with attention to its experimental basis.

In this way you may add depth, in a dimension otherwise hardly accessible, to your mathematical understanding.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
1
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ A more basic book in quantum mechanics is "Lectures on QM for mathematicians" by Faddeev and Yakubovskii. Takhrajan's book is a kind of continuation, or "next level", as he says himself. $\endgroup$
    – Alexandre Eremenko
    Commented Sep 9, 2022 at 1:29
6
$\begingroup$

Some excellent books for mathematicians who begin to study quantum mechanics are

Alexander Givental, Introduction to Quantum Mechanics (available from the author for a very modest price).

L. D. Faddeev and O. A. Yakubovskii, Lectures on quantum mechanics for mathematics students. Translated from the 1980 Russian original by Harold McFaden. With an appendix by Leon Takhtajan. Student Mathematical Library, 47. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2009.

On classical mechanics, I recommend L. Landau and E. Lifshitz, Course of theoretical physics, vol. I, and, of course, V. Arnold, Mathematical methods of classical mechanics.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

For more advanced stuff written by mathematicians, Lectures on Quantum Field Theory by Borcherds, Quantum Fields and Strings: a course for mathematicians (well, easier parts of it, probably - this is a two-volume set!), and, more broad and accessible, written by a rare universalist (that is, physicist but also mathematician), The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe by Penrose.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
1
4
$\begingroup$

I would suggest Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics by V.I Arnold, it does not go over any quantum mechanics discussions, but keep in mind that our intuition to do things like quantization arises from classical concepts.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

I recommend strongly against Leonard Susskinds theoretical minimum. It's written for people who have very rudimentary knowledge not one who has already a bsc in math.

Let me give you some pretext. Pretty much everything in Physics is somehow related to the ideas in Differential Geometry. So having good knowledge of this will help.

Now, for the actual book, Roger Penroses Road to Reality

This book introduces a lot of the Differential Geometry pre requisites and does classical , quantum and relativistic physics in its context.

I really liked this book and I firmly believe that one can get quite far if they are to simply understand all the ideas in the book.

The issue with this book it doesn't teach at all to calculate stuff. You can check out Kai S Lams classical mechanic book for this

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ I do have a bsc in math. $\endgroup$
    – LZB
    Commented Sep 9, 2022 at 6:20
  • $\begingroup$ Take that book and skip to like 8 or 9th chapter. I almost 90% sure it'll appeal more to you than susskund @LZB $\endgroup$
    – Brian
    Commented Sep 9, 2022 at 6:59
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ my understanding was that the OP wished to learn "real physics" (their words), which I interpret as acquiring insight into physical phenomena based on high level concepts and ideas, and in particular the unifying nature of these concepts; one needs little math for that, and I find Susskind's course quite helpful in that respect; it is not the place to go if one seeks mathematical rigor, but that is a very different question (a question which Tom Copeland describes as asking "How does one learn the mathematics of physics devoid of physical intuition?"). $\endgroup$
    – Carlo Beenakker
    Commented Sep 9, 2022 at 8:31
3
$\begingroup$

What kind of physics are you interested in? If you are interested in rigorous introduction to statistical physics, there are classic references such as Grimmett's random cluster model textbook, Yvan Velenik's statistical mechanics textbook, or Duminil-Copin's lecture notes on the Potts model.

If you want a more non-rigorous (i.e. more real-physics flavor) approach to modern statistical physics, John Cardy's RG textbook is good, but I have to warn you the treatment of disordered systems in Chapter 8 is highly non-rigorous and even incorrect in certain cases.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

In case you are interested in general relativity, I suggest taking a look at a book I wrote, A Mathematical Introduction to General Relativity.

It presents general relativity to undergraduate mathematics students in a mathematically rigorous fashion in a `definition-theorem-proof' format. The only physics needed to read it is a basic college course in Physics. A pdf file of sample chapters can be found on the publisher's website above, and a google preview is linked here . The book is intended for self-study, and the solutions to all the (over 200) exercises are included in the book.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .