Me too! Hugh Young was such a warm and generous human being. He famously invited everyone who remained on campus to his home for Thanksgiving. Outstanding teacher and communicator as well.
It's amazing how old books feel soo good to read. You learn a lot from these books and there is a lot of flexibility in what you want to learn. Thanks♥️
A lot of the newer versions of these books combine all the volumes. They come out to be around 1600 pages covering intro mechanics, intro electricity and magnetism, waves, thermodynamics and very basic statistical mechanics, electricity and magnetism, optics, and modern physics! This all covers the first three physics courses, then you redo it all again with the more advanced books lol. Griffiths for electricity and magnetism and for quantum, Taylor for classical mechanics, and Schroeder for thermal physics and statistical mechanics.
This is what I'm using to self-study introductory mechanics. What I like about it is that it assumes no prior knowledge of physics and builds everything from the ground up. (You do need some basic calculus to grasp everything, though.)
An older Sears and Zemansky was my sophomore physics in 1972. Found a first edition in an old bookstore. It was a great book for a hard course; fortunately I had equally great profs and managed a solid B. Needed those 2 semesters of freshman Calc to do it.Thanks for the review.
Wow. Blast from the past. Used that book for my physics courses many moons ago. Having a degree in ME, I can tell you that book is like a condensed degree in ME.
Thanks for sharing this. The only drawback to the older textbooks is that they use far less color and fewer schematics than newer books, owing to the cost of color and illustration back then. The newer books are often easier to follow because of this, though, of course, they cost a lot more.
This text book is a legendary text and is much older than the date mentioned here 1:36 - in fact it is just one of many updates to the original 1949 edition by 2 of the giants in physics instruction.
I bought this edition over 30 years ago for my physics courses in college. The one I bought contained 3 volumes, it was a massive book. Its still in my book shelve.
I studied using Sears and Zemansky when the book was just Sears and Zemansky without Young. This was a long time ago. I believe the book was prescribed by one of my thermodynamics professors. For physics, it was Halliday and Resnick en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentals_of_Physics
I used H&R for my Freshman Physics, when I was a young, sexy Physics Major ... well young, at least. "Thermodynamics, Kinetic Theory, and Statistical Thermodynamics" by Sears and Saliger was the text in my Sophomore thermo course.
I also took calculus 1 and physics 1 together and oh my gosh that was crazy. I’ll admit the physics was more algebra/trig but still my algebra was not mature and it was my first physics class too. Anddddd i was a returning adult. Can’t believe im in my 3rd year at my community college. Took a lot of math classes to get to calculus and i just love math and physics ❤ the challenge is exciting. I just finished writing my comment but i heard you say as long as you know the formulas you’re good? My lil bit of illicit advice, learn how to derive those physics formulas, both algebraic and from calculus. Integrate those formulas in your soul. Know them like you wrote them yourself. It’ll help so much because do you tackle a problem from a perspective of energy? Maybe time isn’t a variable? Or maybe projectile motion is the way? If you do not know WHEN to use the formulas, you’re in trouble.
In hindsight, the hardest part of learning Physics is understanding the physical principles qualititatively, developing the judgement to formulate a reasonable model (approximations, etc.), and from this explain what should happen based on the Physics. Learning to visualize well goes a long way. Then worry about the math. PS: Taking Calculus and Calculus-based Physics in parallel, the only way to fly!
It sounds like a better idea to me to go through an algebra-based Physics textbook while learning Calculus, so as to focus more on understanding the concepts in each course, and to leave learning about differential and integral forms for more advanced Physics courses.
@@alfredomulleretxeberria4239 Having calculus be a co-requisite to calc-based physics is typical requrement; it saves you a semester or more. Considering the challenges of a Physics Major, this is the shallow part of the gator pond!
@@maalikserebryakov Interesting. I'm far from a modern Physics Major: I finished my Undergrad in the late 80's, when FAX machines and e-mail were novelites. XD Even then, it seemed like Physics boiled down to solving differential equations in terms of sets of orthogonal functions. Non-linear Classical dynamics and collective phenomena put the WOW! back into Physics for me. There's more to Physics than doing a computation; it's doing the right computation.
11th international edition with modern physics (only Special Relativity parts were relevant) is what I used. It only partially covered what we had to learn, as I was in an extremely difficult physics program that was not well geared towards students to put it mildly. I've seen newer editions add more stuff relevant to biophysics.
I enjoy my copy of UP (13th edition) but it's definitely a bittersweet book. Very useful when i was in those intro classes, but i go back and forth on it's viability as a shelf book. Its very dense, ie, hard to read thru if you already know a lot of it, but at the same time, if you are going back to a topic you are super rusty on, i can see that being a good thing. I do also like the scope it covers, it has SOMETHING on everything you could touch in undergrad. Ive been evaluating Fundamentals of Physics by Shankar as a slimmer alternative, based off a Lecture series. Very readable, but a bit more difficult in the math. Unlike this book where you get examples if every kind of problem and the variations in the hw problems, he gives you a more foundational understanding that's more akin to taylors and Griffiths books (but not as difficult) and expects you to figure out these cases on your own. Much harder, but encourages you to actually problem solve as opposed to just "monkey see, monkey do" which plagues a lot of stem work in college.
I bought this book 15 years ago brand new (12th edition). An excellent book on physics. It's calculus based. There are also good books on physics that are not calculus based, e.g., the book by Serway and Vuille _College Physcis._ I also recommend a solutions manual to check your solutions. There are some challenging problems present (marked with asterisks) but there aren't many of them, unfortunately. I enjoy tougher problems.
The current 15th edition doesn't list Sears and Zemansky as authors any more. It's credited only to Young and a new co-author Freedman now. Runs 1600 pages! Only available in paperback (at least the SI units version). I think I'd prefer your copy.
Wow, I was just looking for physics book on Amazon and this video came up. Lol. Sir, can you please do a video on the thick book from Halliday from your 10 math and physics book a couple weeks ago? I think I want to get that. Thanks!
HDY was my freshman instructor at CMU 1968 using his 1st edition. I later learned some of the examples came from Newton principia without mentioning it 🤷♂️ recognized them later when I read an English translation of Newton.
Hello math sorcerer . I had a question; How many physics courses did you take in university during years 3 and 4 ? (If any as you did mention taking physics 1,2,3 during years 1 and 2) Thanks for the informative content.
I have been reading Resnik for quite some time and found I learned very little. So I decided to get this one. This book is very detailed. But I am unable to get a colored print. Can you help me Mr. Sorcerer 😊?
I have this book, my father had it for years, he loves it! you think I should use it as a physics major? I'm currently using Physics for Scientists and Engineers by Serway & Jewett 9th edition
How about a basic physics book for people that are already fluent in the undergrad math required? I would like to see tensors and wave propagation in detail - some aspects are not complete in my understanding - wrt soft boundary conditions. It's in my school books, but not in the depth I wanted.
Three classic upper-division undergrad texts in physics are: The Variational Principles of Mechanics by Cornelius Lanczos Classical Mechanics by Herbert Goldstein, Classical Dynamics of Particles and Systems by Jerry B. Marion
@@richardgray8593 I got an excellent section on Lagrange in my O'Neil book "Advanced Engineering Mathematics" - the third section on this topic is a total misprint but you can get the idea and do the derivations from learning the other sections. So as far as classical mechanics goes, I think its been done often, but not often done well. The book you quote has a little more depth and scope than I was looking for. I have it, haven't cracked it open yet.
I attended CMU in the late 80s…that was my textbook, and Hugh Young was my professor for physics 1, 2, and 3!
Lucky 🤞
Me too! Hugh Young was such a warm and generous human being. He famously invited everyone who remained on campus to his home for Thanksgiving. Outstanding teacher and communicator as well.
It's amazing how old books feel soo good to read. You learn a lot from these books and there is a lot of flexibility in what you want to learn. Thanks♥️
The library of Alexandria is becoming negligible compared to the Sorcerer's collections
😂
A lot of the newer versions of these books combine all the volumes. They come out to be around 1600 pages covering intro mechanics, intro electricity and magnetism, waves, thermodynamics and very basic statistical mechanics, electricity and magnetism, optics, and modern physics! This all covers the first three physics courses, then you redo it all again with the more advanced books lol. Griffiths for electricity and magnetism and for quantum, Taylor for classical mechanics, and Schroeder for thermal physics and statistical mechanics.
Yeah, This book is quite exhausting
Even though it's called University Physics, it's actually pretty popular among high school students to study AP Physics!
This is what I'm using to self-study introductory mechanics. What I like about it is that it assumes no prior knowledge of physics and builds everything from the ground up. (You do need some basic calculus to grasp everything, though.)
An older Sears and Zemansky was my sophomore physics in 1972. Found a first edition in an old bookstore. It was a great book for a hard course; fortunately I had equally great profs and managed a solid B. Needed those 2 semesters of freshman Calc to do it.Thanks for the review.
All these are classics, esp first editions.
They continue to educate long after they are dead.
Wow. Blast from the past. Used that book for my physics courses many moons ago. Having a degree in ME, I can tell you that book is like a condensed degree in ME.
I'm reading the College one from '59 and LOVING it! modern textbooks have so much fluff and 'confidence builder' problems!
Very good Book no doubt! And also it is Awsome to see you bringing Physics Books on your show! Congratulations and keep on doing it! Bring'em on! 😀
Thanks for sharing this. The only drawback to the older textbooks is that they use far less color and fewer schematics than newer books, owing to the cost of color and illustration back then. The newer books are often easier to follow because of this, though, of course, they cost a lot more.
This text book is a legendary text and is much older than the date mentioned here 1:36 - in fact it is just one of many updates to the original 1949 edition by 2 of the giants in physics instruction.
I bought this edition over 30 years ago for my physics courses in college. The one I bought contained 3 volumes, it was a massive book. Its still in my book shelve.
I studied using Sears and Zemansky when the book was just Sears and Zemansky without Young. This was a long time ago.
I believe the book was prescribed by one of my thermodynamics professors.
For physics, it was Halliday and Resnick
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentals_of_Physics
I used H&R for my Freshman Physics, when I was a young, sexy Physics Major ... well young, at least.
"Thermodynamics, Kinetic Theory, and Statistical Thermodynamics" by Sears and Saliger was the text in my Sophomore thermo course.
This was my textbook in college. Pretty reasonable
I passed physics 1 with this book. Very well made and useful
I also took calculus 1 and physics 1 together and oh my gosh that was crazy. I’ll admit the physics was more algebra/trig but still my algebra was not mature and it was my first physics class too. Anddddd i was a returning adult. Can’t believe im in my 3rd year at my community college. Took a lot of math classes to get to calculus and i just love math and physics ❤ the challenge is exciting.
I just finished writing my comment but i heard you say as long as you know the formulas you’re good? My lil bit of illicit advice, learn how to derive those physics formulas, both algebraic and from calculus. Integrate those formulas in your soul. Know them like you wrote them yourself. It’ll help so much because do you tackle a problem from a perspective of energy? Maybe time isn’t a variable? Or maybe projectile motion is the way? If you do not know WHEN to use the formulas, you’re in trouble.
@@lorax121323 more like 6 years. I had to take about a year or 3 semesters to get to calculus.
Nice, I have the newer edition of this book, a classic for all physics majors!
In hindsight, the hardest part of learning Physics is understanding the physical principles qualititatively, developing the judgement to formulate a reasonable model (approximations, etc.), and from this explain what should happen based on the Physics. Learning to visualize well goes a long way.
Then worry about the math.
PS: Taking Calculus and Calculus-based Physics in parallel, the only way to fly!
It sounds like a better idea to me to go through an algebra-based Physics textbook while learning Calculus, so as to focus more on understanding the concepts in each course, and to leave learning about differential and integral forms for more advanced Physics courses.
@@alfredomulleretxeberria4239 Having calculus be a co-requisite to calc-based physics is typical requrement; it saves you a semester or more.
Considering the challenges of a Physics Major, this is the shallow part of the gator pond!
@@maalikserebryakov Interesting.
I'm far from a modern Physics Major: I finished my Undergrad in the late 80's, when FAX machines and e-mail were novelites. XD Even then, it seemed like Physics boiled down to solving differential equations in terms of sets of orthogonal functions. Non-linear Classical dynamics and collective phenomena put the WOW! back into Physics for me.
There's more to Physics than doing a computation; it's doing the right computation.
@@maalikserebryakov That's grim.
The sophisticated computational tools available now are great, but shouldn't substitute for physical understanding.
11th international edition with modern physics (only Special Relativity parts were relevant) is what I used. It only partially covered what we had to learn, as I was in an extremely difficult physics program that was not well geared towards students to put it mildly.
I've seen newer editions add more stuff relevant to biophysics.
I enjoy my copy of UP (13th edition) but it's definitely a bittersweet book. Very useful when i was in those intro classes, but i go back and forth on it's viability as a shelf book. Its very dense, ie, hard to read thru if you already know a lot of it, but at the same time, if you are going back to a topic you are super rusty on, i can see that being a good thing. I do also like the scope it covers, it has SOMETHING on everything you could touch in undergrad.
Ive been evaluating Fundamentals of Physics by Shankar as a slimmer alternative, based off a Lecture series. Very readable, but a bit more difficult in the math. Unlike this book where you get examples if every kind of problem and the variations in the hw problems, he gives you a more foundational understanding that's more akin to taylors and Griffiths books (but not as difficult) and expects you to figure out these cases on your own. Much harder, but encourages you to actually problem solve as opposed to just "monkey see, monkey do" which plagues a lot of stem work in college.
The book has deteriorated over the multiple editions. Compare to the earlier versions. It was a better product.
I bought this book 15 years ago brand new (12th edition). An excellent book on physics. It's calculus based. There are also good books on physics that are not calculus based, e.g., the book by Serway and Vuille _College Physcis._ I also recommend a solutions manual to check your solutions. There are some challenging problems present (marked with asterisks) but there aren't many of them, unfortunately. I enjoy tougher problems.
I used a later compendium edition for freshman physics as well, classic
Wow! Amazing magic Math Sorceror! I've never read Zemansky. Keep up the good work.
I’ve used this book, the problems are good but I didn’t love the way the concepts are explained
The current 15th edition doesn't list Sears and Zemansky as authors any more. It's credited only to Young and a new co-author Freedman now. Runs 1600 pages! Only available in paperback (at least the SI units version). I think I'd prefer your copy.
Wow, I was just looking for physics book on Amazon and this video came up. Lol. Sir, can you please do a video on the thick book from Halliday from your 10 math and physics book a couple weeks ago? I think I want to get that. Thanks!
It's a great book to clear all your basis before diving deep into specific topics. Enjoy
Will do!
I also made the mistake of taking Physics I and Calculus I at the same time. Would not recommend. At all.
This book is really amazing and in depth too😃
yesterday i bought the Alonso Finn I book.........just saying
I have a deep connection with this book, 13 edition actually.
I had that book for engineering
I used an earlier version of the Sam's book, and college the next year used the same text as in high school
HDY was my freshman instructor at CMU 1968 using his 1st edition.
I later learned some of the examples came from Newton principia without mentioning it 🤷♂️ recognized them later when I read an English translation of Newton.
I have the same book
How to get the PDF of this book?
I am fighting against this book for at least 3 years and still haven’t finished it
Hello math sorcerer . I had a question; How many physics courses did you take in university during years 3 and 4 ? (If any as you did mention taking physics 1,2,3 during years 1 and 2)
Thanks for the informative content.
Just physics 1,2,3 that’s it
Which higher algebra book is better, the one by Hall and Knight or the one by Bernard and Child?
I have been reading Resnik for quite some time and found I learned very little. So I decided to get this one. This book is very detailed. But I am unable to get a colored print. Can you help me Mr. Sorcerer 😊?
How does it compare to fundamentals of physics by halliday
Question for Math Sorcerer:
If you had to choose a math book to be stranded on an island with, which would it be?
Please review Concepts of physics by H C Verma
Useless for Olympiads
I have this book, my father had it for years, he loves it! you think I should use it as a physics major? I'm currently using Physics for Scientists and Engineers by Serway & Jewett 9th edition
Serway is a great book!! Physics by Young and Freedman is another great one!
The volume on your videos is too low lately.
From high school to masters, any student can use it.
How about a basic physics book for people that are already fluent in the undergrad math required? I would like to see tensors and wave propagation in detail - some aspects are not complete in my understanding - wrt soft boundary conditions. It's in my school books, but not in the depth I wanted.
Three classic upper-division undergrad texts in physics are:
The Variational Principles of Mechanics by Cornelius Lanczos
Classical Mechanics by Herbert Goldstein,
Classical Dynamics of Particles and Systems by Jerry B. Marion
@@richardgray8593 I got an excellent section on Lagrange in my O'Neil book "Advanced Engineering Mathematics" - the third section on this topic is a total misprint but you can get the idea and do the derivations from learning the other sections. So as far as classical mechanics goes, I think its been done often, but not often done well. The book you quote has a little more depth and scope than I was looking for. I have it, haven't cracked it open yet.
You’re not helping my book addiction! Lol
Bibliotaphs Unite!
people who prepare for jee advanced examination will feel these topics familiar and they had already done with these enough #jee2023 😅
Please do not say that 1986 was along time ago. I feel old enough already! I do not to be reminded that I am a geezer.
MS: "I found this great old book on . It was published in 1963. WOW! That was sooo long ago!"
DS: "Hey! *I* was published in 1963!"