Skip to main content
13 events
when toggle format what by license comment
May 27, 2019 at 18:53 history made wiki Post Made Community Wiki by Qmechanic
Nov 13, 2014 at 19:21 history edited Qmechanic
edited tags
Nov 13, 2014 at 19:02 comment added Danu ...then you should check out the book recommendations threads on this site.
Nov 13, 2014 at 18:59 comment added Bryan @Danu: Yes, I understand your arguments. I'm OK with a resource that is as incomplete and lacking in detail as necessary to make the request reasonable!
Nov 13, 2014 at 18:32 history closed Kyle Kanos
ACuriousMind
John Rennie
Danu
Brandon Enright
Duplicate of Beginner Physics Resources? [closed]
Nov 13, 2014 at 18:15 comment added Danu Your request is unreasonable, it's as simple as that. Your map analogy fails miserably because maps are not complicated to the point where you'd have to study 10+ years to understand what even ONE of the countries really looks like (on the map). Do you understand what we're getting at?
Nov 13, 2014 at 18:13 comment added Kyle Kanos @Bryan: But if someone weren't asking for simply a map, but information on the demographics and resources of the nations in the world, a geography textbook would be the best gesture. Here, you are not simply asking for a map of physics, you are asking for a detailed layout of the differing subsets of physics. Therefore, a textbook is your best bet.
Nov 13, 2014 at 18:11 comment added Bryan @KyleKanos: I'm hoping for a specific technical resource to be used as a reference. If someone asked for a map of the world, you wouldn't hand them a geography textbook.
Nov 13, 2014 at 18:05 comment added Bryan @ACuriousMind: I'm looking for a map of the subsets of physics, not a map of THE physics.
Nov 13, 2014 at 18:05 review Close votes
Nov 13, 2014 at 18:32
Nov 13, 2014 at 17:31 comment added ACuriousMind There are no "equations of physics". The order in which one would say things are more "fundamental" and more "derived" is not the order in which one should learn them, and often the more "fundamental" things are not needed at all for the "coarser" stuff. It is also heavily opinion-based what "most fundamental" even means. Do you think that if there were such a resource as you describe, there would still be hundreds upon hundreds of books on tiny subsets of physics?
Nov 13, 2014 at 17:30 review First posts
Nov 13, 2014 at 17:40
Nov 13, 2014 at 17:26 history asked Bryan CC BY-SA 3.0