| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Mike Speed" |
| Date: |
06 Oct 2005 04:40:15 PM |
| Object: |
The curent state of physics |
I have some books I have read on physics - they seem to grow out of
date quickly . What is the current state of these aspects of Physics?
Including such questions as:
What is the forefont on the Grand Unified Theory?
Whst is the forefront on the currecnt state of a Theory of Everything?
What has been accomblished in the field of turbulnce.
Why does the top quark so much more massive that the other quarks?
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: The curent state of physics |
06 Oct 2005 06:00:46 PM |
|
|
Evidently you have been misled into believing that the coffee table
cosmology books sold in mass by 'Barnes and Nobel' are not 'physics',
in which case you are a bit confused.
I really can't think of any real physics textbooks puublished since the
early 1950s that are obsolete (with the minor exception of very minimal
updates, and I'm a graduate physicist. The classic 'Sears and Zemensky
and Halliday and Resnick texts are still widely employed for the
teaching of Physics 101 courses in a majority of the leading
universities in our country. Real physics pays very little attention to
things like the "Grand Unified Theory" much less a "Theory of
Everything" so maybe it's time for you to get a grasp on reality.
If you really want to get a grip on speculative physics, first you will
have to master an introductory knowledge of mechanics, heat, light and
electricity, plus a superficial familiarity with calculus (quite likely
your will have to purchase some serious texts from Amazon.com, but you
sure are very unlikely to find any at 'Barnes and Noble", "Borders" or
maybe other mass distributors of 'coffe table' books
Just my opinion.
Harry C.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: The current state of physics (maths references) |
11 Oct 2005 07:39:21 PM |
|
|
wrote:
If you really want to get a grip on speculative physics, first
you will have to master an introductory knowledge of mechanics,
heat, light and electricity, plus a superficial familiarity with
calculus
... and the rest! A "superficial familiarity with calculus" is about
as much help with string theory as a warm woollen hat is for walking
on the far side of the Moon, and I should know, as I've been there
(trying to study string theory, not walking on the Moon ;-)
I'm sure the OP isn't interested in literally getting up to speed
with all the maths necessary to follow the latest physics papers.
Apart from anything else 99% of them are bound to be barking up
the wrong tree to a greater or lesser extent, by the very nature
of specialized cutting edge research. So "bystanders" are better
off generally confining themselves to summaries in popular science
journals, and letting the experts fight it out among themselves
until a broad consensus is reached.
But in case, or for anyone else who is, I recommend the following
among others to be studied roughly in the order listed:
* Algebra (3rd ed); Serge Lang
* Topology; Klaus Janich; Springer-Verlag;
ISBN 0-387-90892-7
* A Comprehensive Introduction to Differential Geometry
(five vols); Mike Spivak; Publish or Perish Inc;
ISBN 0-914098-88-88
* Algebraic Topology; Edwin H Spanier; Springer;
ISBN 0-387-90646-0
* (a comprehensive account of Lie theory)
The Janich book is a great introduction to Topology - chatty
and intuitive, with plenty of examples and interesting detours,
and yet rigorous and comprehensive.
Algebraic topology books always seem to me extremely austere
and forbidding; but then I guess it is a tough subject by
its nature.
Apart from the volume in the Bourbaki series, can anyone
recomment some decent books on Lie theory and Lie groups?
I'd be interested to know myself.
Any other decent maths references welcome as well.
Cheers
John R Ramsden (jhnrmsdn@yahoo.com.uk)
* Remove m from com to reply
* "From" address is defunct
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Hobba" |
|
| Title: Re: The current state of physics (maths references) |
11 Oct 2005 08:08:47 PM |
|
|
<john_ramsden@sagitta-ps.com> wrote in message
news:1129077561.376192.60420@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
hhc314@yahoo.com wrote:
If you really want to get a grip on speculative physics, first
you will have to master an introductory knowledge of mechanics,
heat, light and electricity, plus a superficial familiarity with
calculus
.. and the rest! A "superficial familiarity with calculus" is about
as much help with string theory as a warm woollen hat is for walking
on the far side of the Moon, and I should know, as I've been there
(trying to study string theory, not walking on the Moon ;-)
I'm sure the OP isn't interested in literally getting up to speed
with all the maths necessary to follow the latest physics papers.
Apart from anything else 99% of them are bound to be barking up
the wrong tree to a greater or lesser extent, by the very nature
of specialized cutting edge research. So "bystanders" are better
off generally confining themselves to summaries in popular science
journals, and letting the experts fight it out among themselves
until a broad consensus is reached.
But in case, or for anyone else who is, I recommend the following
among others to be studied roughly in the order listed:
* Algebra (3rd ed); Serge Lang
* Topology; Klaus Janich; Springer-Verlag;
ISBN 0-387-90892-7
* A Comprehensive Introduction to Differential Geometry
(five vols); Mike Spivak; Publish or Perish Inc;
ISBN 0-914098-88-88
* Algebraic Topology; Edwin H Spanier; Springer;
ISBN 0-387-90646-0
* (a comprehensive account of Lie theory)
The Janich book is a great introduction to Topology - chatty
and intuitive, with plenty of examples and interesting detours,
and yet rigorous and comprehensive.
Algebraic topology books always seem to me extremely austere
and forbidding; but then I guess it is a tough subject by
its nature.
Apart from the volume in the Bourbaki series, can anyone
recomment some decent books on Lie theory and Lie groups?
Check out
http://www.nbi.dk/GroupTheory/
I liked it.
Thanks
Bill
I'd be interested to know myself.
Any other decent maths references welcome as well.
Cheers
John R Ramsden (jhnrmsdn@yahoo.com.uk)
* Remove m from com to reply
* "From" address is defunct
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: The current state of physics (maths references) |
12 Oct 2005 08:47:45 PM |
|
|
wrote:
hhc314@yahoo.com wrote:
If you really want to get a grip on speculative physics, first
you will have to master an introductory knowledge of mechanics,
heat, light and electricity, plus a superficial familiarity with
calculus
xnipped
...and letting the experts fight it out among themselves
until a broad consensus is reached.
John R Ramsden (jhnrmsdn@yahoo.com.uk)
xxein: Physics is a consensus?
Well, I guess if nobody actually knows physics, that is the best we can
do, eh?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory L. Hansen" |
|
| Title: Re: The curent state of physics |
07 Oct 2005 11:45:35 AM |
|
|
In article <1128634815.036501.146640@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Mike Speed <mike8s2@yahoo.com> wrote:
I have some books I have read on physics - they seem to grow out of
date quickly . What is the current state of these aspects of Physics?
Including such questions as:
What is the forefont on the Grand Unified Theory?
Whst is the forefront on the currecnt state of a Theory of Everything?
What has been accomblished in the field of turbulnce.
Why does the top quark so much more massive that the other quarks?
There's physics texts, there's current research published in the
professional journals, and then there's physics books and magazine
articles that present current research to the layman.
Physics texts have a very long shelf life. For example, Goldstein's
_Classical Mechanics_, second edition published in 1980 and still used in
schools today, is basically late 19th century physics that is still an
essential foundation to quantum mechanics and field theories. Modern
quantum field theories are still defined with a Lagrangian, commutators
still have an equivalent in the Poisson bracket, and so on. Use the
textbooks to get your foundation, and go to the journals like Physical
Review or Gravitation and General Relativity, and the arXives, to monitor
the cutting edge.
If you want continuing updates for the layman, get a subscription to
Science News or similar magazine. Instead of www.google.com, use
scholar.google.com to help you sort through the garbage.
--
"'No user-serviceable parts inside.' I'll be the judge of that!"
.
|
|
|
| User: "blackboab" |
|
| Title: Re: The curent state of physics |
07 Oct 2005 12:17:45 PM |
|
|
"'No user-serviceable parts inside.' I'll be the judge of that!"
is that what you want as your epitaph :-)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles Androcles@ MyPlace.org" |
|
| Title: Re: The curent state of physics |
07 Oct 2005 12:37:45 PM |
|
|
"blackboab" <blackboab@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128705465.873887.87110@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
| "'No user-serviceable parts inside.' I'll be the judge of that!"
|
| is that what you want as your epitaph :-)
Ok, that's enough.
*plonk*
androcles.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory L. Hansen" |
|
| Title: Re: The curent state of physics |
09 Oct 2005 08:38:47 PM |
|
|
In article <Jny1f.605$tS4.338@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
Androcles <Androcles@ MyPlace.org> wrote:
"blackboab" <blackboab@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128705465.873887.87110@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
| "'No user-serviceable parts inside.' I'll be the judge of that!"
|
| is that what you want as your epitaph :-)
Ok, that's enough.
*plonk*
androcles.
It's suitably funny. I hadn't thought of it quite that way, but it's like
saying "What can go wrong?", or "How hard can it be?"
Famous last words: "What does this button do?"
Anecdote: My brother and I were going to a movie, he was driving, and we
were running short on time. Then the sign ahead said "Road closed". He
said "Road closed, eh? I'll be the judge of that!" And we bumped along,
plowed into the mud, fishtailing back and forth, almost bogged down, and
finally climbed out on the other side. And he said "I guess it was
closed."
And I thought of that when my amplified TV antenna went on the fritz, and
I read the warning on the label before I opened it up to solder a loose
connection.
--
"Funny, how close to God you can become on a Harley... " -- Dr. Squat
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles Androcles@ MyPlace.org" |
|
| Title: Re: The curent state of physics |
10 Oct 2005 07:34:28 AM |
|
|
"Gregory L. Hansen" <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
news:dicgn7$c7l$5@rainier.uits.indiana.edu...
| In article <Jny1f.605$tS4.338@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
| Androcles <Androcles@ MyPlace.org> wrote:
| >
| >"blackboab" <blackboab@gmail.com> wrote in message
| >news:1128705465.873887.87110@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
| >| "'No user-serviceable parts inside.' I'll be the judge of that!"
| >|
| >| is that what you want as your epitaph :-)
| >
| >Ok, that's enough.
| >*plonk*
| >androcles.
| >
|
|
| It's suitably funny. I hadn't thought of it quite that way, but it's
like
| saying "What can go wrong?", or "How hard can it be?"
|
| Famous last words: "What does this button do?"
|
| Anecdote: My brother and I were going to a movie, he was driving, and
we
| were running short on time. Then the sign ahead said "Road closed".
He
| said "Road closed, eh? I'll be the judge of that!" And we bumped
along,
| plowed into the mud, fishtailing back and forth, almost bogged down,
and
| finally climbed out on the other side. And he said "I guess it was
| closed."
|
| And I thought of that when my amplified TV antenna went on the fritz,
and
| I read the warning on the label before I opened it up to solder a
loose
| connection.
I plonked him not for one post, but persistent willful ignorance.
At first he wanted to ask questions, now he wants to play games.
Obviously a troll with a new nick.
Androcles
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: The curent state of physics |
09 Oct 2005 10:18:36 PM |
|
|
Famous last words: "What does this button do?"
*****************************
"It says "Destroy the Earth" General Cartwright. Can that possibly be
right?"
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: The curent state of physics |
11 Oct 2005 08:03:12 PM |
|
|
blackboab wrote:
"'No user-serviceable parts inside.' I'll be the judge of that!"
is that what you want as your epitaph :-)
Driving in London these days, I've decided on my epitaph:
"Well I had the right of way!"
(and Androcles, if I'm not still in your kill file - sod off)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: The curent state of physics |
06 Oct 2005 06:07:08 PM |
|
|
Mike Speed wrote:
I have some books I have read on physics - they seem to grow out of
date quickly . What is the current state of these aspects of Physics?
Including such questions as:
What is the forefont on the Grand Unified Theory?
Whst is the forefront on the currecnt state of a Theory of Everything?
What has been accomblished in the field of turbulnce.
Why does the top quark so much more massive that the other quarks?
http://arxiv.org/
http://www.scirus.com/
hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html
http://www.motionmountain.net
http://www.fuckinggoogleit.com/
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Speed" |
|
| Title: Re: The curent state of physics |
07 Oct 2005 08:52:43 AM |
|
|
Thanks, Uncle Al. Yes, I know about fuckinggoogleit.com, but many
queries to google seem to be suffused with gubbage. Thanks for taking
the time to reply.
Regards,
Mike
.
|
|
|
| User: "tadchem" |
|
| Title: Re: The curent state of physics |
07 Oct 2005 12:48:21 PM |
|
|
Mike Speed wrote:
Thanks, Uncle Al. Yes, I know about fuckinggoogleit.com, but many
queries to google seem to be suffused with gubbage. Thanks for taking
the time to reply.
Try Google Advanced Search.
http://www.google.com/advanced_search?hl=en
With a little thought and experience you can craft a search that will
give you a minimal number of pages with a high relevance to your topic.
This takes mostly some thought regarding key phrases and less-frequent
words. You can even pre-specify Language, File Format, Date,
Occurrences, and Domain.
Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: The curent state of physics |
10 Oct 2005 01:10:35 PM |
|
|
Mike Speed wrote:
What is the current state of these aspects of Physics?
The current state of physics is |psi>.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Speed" |
|
| Title: Re: The curent state of physics |
08 Oct 2005 07:20:46 AM |
|
|
Okay, this all has been good information. Can I infere books in the
vein of "In Search of Schrodinger's Cat" or are bull****?
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
