ITT:
Post what you think is the definitive text on a field of your choice (textbook, paper, whatever)
Rules: if you disagree with someone's pick for their field, offer an alternative.
Starting with Introductory E&M
Both volumes.
The Bible of cell biology.
For a first pass at cosmology
pretty much the definitive introduction to microelectronics
sedra smith is literally my hero
>>7772980
overcited but great exposition for applications, all you need is like, calculus 1, linear algebra and stats and it gives you all the intuition you will ever need
its a totally new perspective, you will seee the world differently after reading this
although if you want to study information theory for the sake of it you will need to do a lot more work
>>7772989
> string theory
> 2016
pls go
>>7772980
Wrong,
Purcell is better than Griffin imo
>>7773049
>>7772980
When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
grow up children
>>7773068
Meh jackson is too convoluted and has too many mistakes, try Melia, Electrodynamics or Panofsky
Pretty obvious for real analysis
>>7772995
Looks like a uterus.
>>7773011
My electronics I is using this book
Can't wait for that class
>>7772995
Top notch
>>7773095
go home ass hat
rudin sacrifices lucidity for trite concise proofs
the exercises are hard and offer in return nothing other than a waste of time and a sore brain, there are less painful ways to acquire practice
its a book people claim to have read for 'bragging rights'
discard everyone who claims to have worked through rudin
dont bother, read something with decent exposition like bartle, then go to folland for a treatment of the non-training-wheels theory of integration
literally anyone but rudin
>>7773068
This. kek.
But seriously just get Jackson. It's pointless to waste time on Griff's book. Don't bother with his QM either.
>>7773258
Easy books like Griffiths make people feel good because it makes the reader believe they understand the subject. Only once they try to read higher level books they will realize that they haven't actually understood shit and fail badly.
>>7772980
>introduction to electrodynamics
>has time-independent wave equations on cover
>>7772989
>string theory
cool... a philosophy major!
http://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2015/12/23/why-string-theory-is-not-science/
Introductory classical mechanics
>>7772991
Are you the same guy that keeps posting this for the past few days?
Inter-universal Teichmuller Theory I–IV
Hoping this for FEM, just picked it up
>>7773538
Kek
>he fell for the computer science meme
no this is actually a good book
i think textbook threads are the best threads on /sci/ even with all of the memes and shitposting
>>7773250
>the exercises are hard
I don't think you belong in mathematics my friend.
Rudin is an astounding book in beauty and conciseness, every reputable mathematician I've ever met has said that. If you don't understand it, I invite you to study harder instead of hating on people who do.
>>7773577
>fucking spyro the dragon on the cover
>>7773577
Engineering > *
>>7773577
>Writing a book about compilers that targets kids
topkek, I can appreciate the believes of the author but it is clear now that any kid who touches programming will just be doing shitty 2D videogames.
[scispoiler]talking from experience[/scispoiler]
>tfw definitive texts in my field aren't available in English
>>7772980
The core of any biophysics PhD program curriculum is statistical thermodynamics.
>>7773917
Post the titles of the books anyway.
God King of Developmental Biology texts
>>7774429
No, it's not. It's about memorizing shit, biofag.
>>7774501
Aren't biophysics PhDs mostly coming from a physics/engineering/chemistry background?
missing only problem sets, otherwise it would be the only book you'd ever need.
(Stinson has dank problem sets btw)
>>7773324
>It makes physical predictions, such as:
>the existence of supersymmetric particles
That's supersymmetry not string theory. Supersymmetry was woven into string theory but the predictions of extra particles wasn't a string theoretic prediction. Looks one more guy who doesn't know what he's talking about.
>b..but he has a Ph.D
So? Doesn't mean he knows shit about string theory.
>>7773011
You're definitely right, but I fucking hate this book so much. Every chapter is so fucking drawn out. There are no broad concepts covered, so it comes down to just memorizing shit.
>>7773603
Not who you were replying to, and I agree with you more or less.
If you are not analytically inclined though, there are better books. I knew I had no interest in analysis by the time I was in grad school, so I just used Apostol and some other measure theory book. I looked at both Rudins and Royden and would have hated using any of those as a course text. I liked the thorough explanations and handholding. Maybe I didn't learn analysis as well, but I don't care about analysis past passing a class or two and a qual.
>>7774510
Yeah, you usually apply to a Physics PhD program then move over into it. Unless specifically biophysics programs are becoming more popular in recent years.
>>7774528
Yes but String Theory predicts supersymmetry.
>>7774429
Pretty cover for an overpriced piece of shit to be honest.
A text should never try to cover calculus, statistical mechanics and all those applied topics so superficially in on book.
I would recommend alternatives, but there are no good definitive texts in the field.
>>7773346
real classical mechanics
>>7772980
I feel you can't do a best book on EM. It can be written down, approached and used in so many different languages - you have to make a choice and it's necessarily offensive.
>>7772989
The problem is that string theory is an seemingly infinite field and this is just the intro to the entry ideas
A good intro to QFT
Quite comprehensive
>>7774532
Rudin is a worse text for the analytically inclined as well. Getting through Rudin with a solid mechanical understanding of the material, just to pass a course, say, is doable.
Building a solid intuition for the basic ideas of analysis (which you absolutely need if analysis is important to you) requires such heavy supplementing that you might as well just use another book, because Rudin gives you absolutely nothing in the form of guidance to figure out how to start thinking about these topics and what they mean.
Carothers is an analysis book that happens to be a great example of what I'm talking about with explanations. It's what I used on my own after my uni used Rudin and I really wish I had seen it first.
>>7774528
ST is so fucked, they organized a conference with philosophers to discuss how to proceed.
https://www.quantamagazine.org/20151216-physicists-and-philosophers-debate-the-boundaries-of-science/
>Fundamental physics faces a problem, Gross explained — one dire enough to call for outsiders’ perspectives. “I’m not sure that we don’t need each other at this point in time,” he said.
>It was the opening session of a three-day workshop, held in a Romanesque-style lecture hall at Ludwig Maximilian University (LMU Munich) one year after George Ellis and Joe Silk, two white-haired physicists now sitting in the front row, called for such a conference in an incendiary opinion piece in Nature. One hundred attendees had descended on a land with a celebrated tradition in both physics and the philosophy of science to wage what Ellis and Silk declared a “battle for the heart and soul of physics.”
>The crisis, as Ellis and Silk tell it, is the wildly speculative nature of modern physics theories, which they say reflects a dangerous departure from the scientific method. Many of today’s theorists — chief among them the proponents of string theory and the multiverse hypothesis — appear convinced of their ideas on the grounds that they are beautiful or logically compelling, despite the impossibility of testing them. Ellis and Silk accused these theorists of “moving the goalposts” of science and blurring the line between physics and pseudoscience. “The imprimatur of science should be awarded only to a theory that is testable,” Ellis and Silk wrote, thereby disqualifying most of the leading theories of the past 40 years. “Only then can we defend science from attack.”
>>7774731
aww man Goldstein is almost unreadable. I liked Fetter/walecka much more (though they skip relativity, but you can get that from Jackson)
>>7773548
Its pretty good, but I didnt like the outdated codes. For FEM theory it does its job.
>>7773035
There is but one definitive text/paper in information theory
Italian edition master race
Linear Algebra
You'll have to complement this with some other book for applications, but if you are mathematically inclined the theorical exposition here is sublime. It's a good introduction to formalism, and beautifully leads the way to abstract algebra
>>7772980
I have a related question.
I'm just starting an ME degree, is there any book (or general resource) I should definitely read to get a good head start?
Condensed matter
People arguing over opinions. Every thread is people claiming their opinion must be the only true conclusion. This is /sci/. This is what this board is about. Goodbye moonmen.
>>7772980
Such a joy to read.
>>7776598
That's life, retard.
The definitive textbook on set theory.
>>7777071
No it's not.
>>7777311
Is it good for undergrads?
you will not find a number theory text from the last hundred years that doesn't cite this
>>7777359
If you're a third or fourth year undergrad, have some prior experience with basic set theory and a bit of algebra, then maybe
trying to learn set theory for the first time from Jech would be a bit like trying to learn basic calculus using Rudin
>>7777359
Not unless you have the mathematical maturity of a graduate student. It certainly wouldn't be appropriate for an undergraduate class on set theory.
>>7772980
this is for pol
>>7774731
>not Landau Lifshitz
Go home.
>>7776590
Igor is my professor! He's the shit! Crazy knowledgable.
>>7772980
>> OP confirmed for undergrad
Every physicist knows the only definitive text for E&M is JD Jackson.
>>7776590
Ive taken a grad level QFT course and after this semester I'll be done an undergrad solid state course as well as undergrad stat mech. Will this be accessible to me?
>>7777458
Yes.
Some introductory books (I used them during my Msc)
Statistical mechanics : Introduction to modern statistical mechanics by David Chandler
Quantum mechanics : Introduction to Quantum Mechanics by David J Griffits
"Astrophysics" : The Physics of Astrophysics Vol 1 and Vol 2 by Frank H Shu
GR/Cosmology : Gravitation and Cosmology: Principles and Applications of the General Theory of Relativity by Steven Weinberg
Particle Physics : Techniques for Nuclear and Particle Physics Experiments by William R Leo
>>7777563
>The Physics of Astrophysics
What kind of name is that? May as well have textbook names like
>The Biology of Molecular Biology
>The Chemistry of Physical Chemistry
for cs
>>7777563
Yo I taught myself from Weinberg's book and after reading through MTW/online relativity problem book I think it's pretty lacking. It's a good reference tool and I still mastered quite a bit of index gymnastics/manipulation from Weinberg but severely lacked a good deal of physical discussion until the latter parts of the book. That said, MTW is pretty damn wordy.
Griffiths also can't hurt as a first pass, but found a great deal of tedium in some differential equations versus a more abstract approach to QM.
Which differential geometry book should I get?
>>7778107
I only finished up through around chapter 6 or so, but Lee's Intro. to Smooth Manifolds was a great read for the basic foundation of diff. geo.
Exercises and problems were good, decent development of material. Really helped me get an idea of the behind-the-scenes in courses like GR/field theory.
>>7778124
Thanks, I'll give it a try.
>>7772980
Group Theory
>>7773577
Don't forget the cinderella book for automata
>>7775263
They're right.
Anyone can fuck around with math, it has no basis in reality if you don't make it falsifiable with real world experiments and it's not real science.
>>7778006
Can't handle KNuths assembly ?
>>7775163
I agree, this book is great.
>>7778433
Not my field of study.
What's that book about and in which situations can you apply its knowledge on real world problems?
Does it have something to do with optimization?
Anyone have a recommendation for introductory polymer chemistry
>>7778584
Very applicable in the real world to many things. Yes, its all about optimization.
>>7778613
Does it relate to linear/nonlinear/integer programming in any way or is it a totally different kind of optimization? Could you give a few simple examples of real world problems you can solve with the mathematical techniques that book teaches?
>>7774492
why does this cover look like a vagina, anus, and thighs from below
длвыoaдлвыoaдвы
>>7778586
Only real prereqs are organic chemistry, though if you're weak on chemical solutions thermodynamics and analytical/quantum chemistry everything past the first 10 synthesis chapters will be largely inaccessible. The last few chapters also assume a very decent background in material science and engineering and the very last chapters requires some knowledge of general EE (microelectronics) at a second year level.
It's a very multidisciplinary field.
>>7778689
Subliminal messaging to make the field seem sexy.
>>7778378
Knuth isn't a single book.
DAILY REMINDER: All textbooks published by Pearson and Pearson subsidiaries are complete GARBAGE and do not belong in this thread.
>>7779129
FURTHERMORE: I call upon my fellow /sci/entists to take up arms and purge the /sci/ wiki of all Pearson textbook recommendations!
>>7773037
What then faggot?
>>7779129
Their service is also garbage.
I asked them about missing chapters in an IE edition that they not warn they were going to remove (they also removed the preface and very important appendices) asking if we could get electronic copies and if the print was intentional or it's a misprint.
They fucking ignored me for weeks then tried to blame the bookstore of all people I eventually found the missing chapters I needed available on the website by the author.
The paper quality was also so fucking shit the book fell apart not 2 months after buying a brand new softcover.
Fuck Pearson. Boycott them and tell your lecturers not to prescribe their garbage.
>>7779138
>Publishers write the books
How's high school?
>>7775145
I have the same book. Although I'm not in grad school. I just got it to get a head start.
>>7779170
>Implying it's a coincidence that Pearson does not publish a single good textbook in any subject
>>7779260
AI A Modern Approach is Pearson I think
>>7779280
and it sucks
>>7777563
>Griffiths
What kind of "Msc" did you do? Certainly not physics. Griffiths is handwavy high school tier shit.
>>7779285
It's probably the best overview book of the field.
>>7779287
Was thinking the same thing, but didn't want to hurt his feelings.
Dover books are generally pretty good.
![$T2eC16NHJHQFFhtL5IfjBRtFLr(Wpg~~48_72[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/FEpDM0w.jpg "$T2eC16NHJHQFFhtL5IfjBRtFLr(Wpg~~48_72[1].jpg")
This is *the* algebra text. Obviously it's not the be-all and end-all of the subject, but if your field requires more than a passing understanding of algebra then you need to know just about everything in this book like the back of your hand.
>>7779446
Agreed, Dover books are almost always fantastic. I love their cover art as well.
>>7779464
read his book on linear alebra? I've got a copy for reference but learned from a professor's lecture notes
There is no other.
>>7779522
I took a course on this but it was from lecture notes and we used Serre every once in a while. What's nice about this book? I've kind of wanted to revisit that material.
Leroy G. Wade is a fucking god.
Another God-tier book.
>>7772980
>>7778363
*High School Group Theory
>>7779464
>>7773068
What the hell should I do to understand this?
>>7773095
lol no even staying with rudin it would be his real and complex analysis book.
>>7773636
>targets kids
I can see you don't know what you're writing about. Go seach "Compiler dragon book". Its probably the best book ever written on compiler design. Bait bitten.
>>7772980
>>7779971
>Not March
>>7778378
knuth's assembly (mix) is unncesessarily cancerous tbqh senpai I dont know about mmix tho.
>>7779975
> Not Mcmurry
>>7780493
read and work through it, disregard potential pain and suffering
>>7773636
>>7780493
Learn PDEs, Fourier Analysis, Distributions, Series Methods for DEs, Special Functions, Green Functions, and Complex Variables like the back of your hand.
>>7780546
It's a CS book, they are all written at the level of 10~13 year olds
>>7781070
not really when I was 12,I was programming low level stuff because I wasn't creative enough to make a game. What I could do was try to understand how computers really worked and do low level stuff
Pharm. Polish translation is great, don't know if it's available in English, though. Great book, but antibiotics part sucks.
>>7781085
Please keep the thread civil and comfy
>>7781751
For anyone new to /sci/, these are the quintessential meme books that we recommend here.
>for geometers
Smooth Manifolds by Lee
>for analysts
Rudin only, R&C Analysis or Principles, depending on mood
>for algebraists
Autism by Lang
![81WBZFUfGgL[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/MkrRXk3.jpg "81WBZFUfGgL[1].jpg")
>>7779971
>>7780562
Coming through
also >lolganic chemistry on /sci/
I am looking for a book about Mathematial physics, focusing on Complex variables, PDE and Fourier transform (basically, starting after multivariate calculus and ODE). What is the /sci/ recommended?
Alternatively, which of these that are included in the torrent in /sci/ wiki do you know and recommend (quite a list):
A Course in Modern Mathematical Physics - Groups, Hilbert Spaces and Diff. Geom. - P. Szekeres
A Guided Tour of Mathematical Physics - Roel Snieder
Applied Mathematical Methods in Theoretical Physics - Masujima M.
Calculus Of Variations With Applications To Physics & Engineering - R. Weinstock
Equations of Mathematical Physics - Bitsadze A.V.
From calculus to chaos - Acheson
Homological Methods in Equations of Mathematical Physics-J.Krasil'schchik
Iintroduction to Groups, Invariants and Particles - F. Kirk
Math methods in physics and engineering with Mathematica - F. Cap
Mathematical Methods for Physicists - a Concise Introduction - T. Chow
Mathematical methods for physics and engineering - Riley, Hobson
Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics, 2nd ed. - V.I. Arnold
Mathematical Tools for Physics - J. Nearing
Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics Vol 1 - Functional Analysis 2nd. ed. - M. Reed
Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics Vol 2 - Fourier Analysis, Self Adjointness - 2nd ed., - M. Reed
Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics Vol 3 - Scattering Theory - M. Reed
Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics Vol 4 - Analysis of Operators - M. Reed
The Fourier Transform And Its Applications - Bracewell
The Mathematical Beauty of Physics - World Scientific -
Topics in Mathematical Physics - Victor Palamodov
>>7782360
Hassani - Mathematical Physics: A Modern Introduction to Its Foundations
>>7782360
>PDEs
Applied Partial Differential Equations: With Fourier Series and Boundary Value Problems by Haberman
Partial Differential Equation: An Introduction by Strauss
Partial Differential Equations by Fritz John
>Fourier
Fourier Series by Tolstov
Fourier Analysis and Its Applications by Folland
Fourier Analysis: An Introduction by Stein & Shakarchi
>Complex Variables
Fundamentals of Complex Analysis: With Applications to Engineering and Science by Saff and Snider
Visual Complex Analysis by Needham
Complex Analysis by Stein & Shakarchi
>>7773577
>>7773623
Those are introductory texts for all the theory that is behind compilers. Personally I think both volumes of "Parsing Theory" (pic related) are the best books about parsing theory... obviously.
>>7778366
I consider that book as one of the worst on the topic: lacks definitions and explain concepts using others that haven't been explained yet. I prefer "Automata, languages and machines" (volume A and B) by Samuel Eilenberg. A book using this theory and very interesting is "Algorithms on strings" by Maxime Crochemore.
>>7772980
>>7772991
utter crap
>>7778689
I am not a bio guy, but it looks like a stomata on a leaf, or a guard cell maybe? I don't fucking know.
These are the only two textbooks I have every used significantly. Nesse could even help a bio major understand optical mineralogy and his birefringence charts don't suck massive dick.
I read this as a hobby, has anyone else read it? Is it good?
>>7782867
did/do you like it?
>>7782867
bump
Is Hartle's Gravity a good book for self study or should I get Schutz?
>>7774501
>No, it's not. It's about memorizing shit, biofag.
I would attempt a legitimate response, but then I remember that this is /sci/, where 18-year-olds who just passed Calc I and first-semester Gen Physics (read: Classical Mechanics) think that now they're on their path to getting PhDs in high energy particle theory from Princeton as they quote Ernest Rutherford while looking down on the rest of us for "stamp collecting".
>>7774510
>Aren't biophysics PhDs mostly coming from a physics/engineering/chemistry background?
>>7774536
>Yeah, you usually apply to a Physics PhD program then move over into it. Unless specifically biophysics programs are becoming more popular in recent years.
Absolutely. Biophysics PhD programs, specifically, are mainly filled by physics and math majors, followed by chemistry majors and engineering majors. In my experiences being around four programs, and interviews at a few more, from undergrad to being a lab tech at a few schools prior to starting my PhD, I would say that less than 1 out of 12 or so biophysics PhD students has an undergrad degree in biology.
>>7774548
>A text should never try to cover calculus, statistical mechanics and all those applied topics so superficially in on book.
Don't disagree with the point on calculus.
I think what makes the book standard in biophysics PhD programs is Dill's explanation of his extension of statistical mechanics to study protein folding.
>>7786179
Nothing with a cover like that can be a legitimate non-highschool textbook.
>>7786705
Shits legit
>>7786705
Tanenbaum's textbooks are great. Surprised you aren't at least aware of them.
>>7786705
Welcome to the world of Computer Science.
>>7786705
All CS books are written at the high school level or below. How else do you think those subhumans pass their courses?
>>7786740
Is that thread still up? I meant to ask him what his retardation is.
>>7778006
The mathematics level in CLRS is appallingly low. It's an algorithms book for high school or middle school kids.
Get a real book if you want to be able to analyze algorithms.
>>7788597
Sedgewick Aho and Knuth are My top CS book writters
Is this book good for building intuition on the subject or is it just a meme?
What's a good textbook for discrete math? inb4 Concrete Math, that's analytic combinatorics. Great but not what I'm looking for. inb4 Rosen. Rosen spends too much time harping on proofs as though I'm a child who hasn't already worked through a book like The Book of Proof by Hammack (excellent book btw).
I'll take a general combinatorics book too, if all "discrete math" books are actually cancer.
>>7789336
Discrete Mathematics with Ducks
>>7772995
read it, hated it. the analysis of GR is fucking abysmal. Better if I say it must be supplemented with an undergrad GR book (woodhouse comes to mind).
>>7773346
fuck this book; get marion and Thorton and never fucking look back.
>>7788963
not a bad book, just not enough rigor and proofs for serious study. i imagine if you supplemented it with ahlfors or conway it would be a good companion.
>>7774731
top kek
the only worked example of euler lagrange equations is flat out wrong in this text.
>>7789360
Fuck that book. My classical mechanics classes were a nightmare and were when I decided to stick solely to math.
>>7780550
i concur; only complaint is the new prints are spotty quality; content is good and if you're competent you can find poor printing ink errors.
>>7782420
Gottfried or Shankar is better, especially in the later chapters where his less capable friends filled in the gaps.
>>7789336
Discrete math books are almost universally terrible. Just read a separate book for each topic.
>Proofs
A Transition to Advanced Mathematics by Smith, Eggen, and Andre
Conjecture and Proof by Laczkovich (Supplement)
>Probability
Introduction to Probability by Bertsekas and Tsitsiklis
Probability in Electrical Engineering & Computer Science: An Application-Driven Course by Walrand (Supplement)
>Statistics*
All of Statistics: A Concise Course in Statistical Inference by Wasserman (Quick crash course)
Probability and Statistics by DeGroot and Schervish
Mathematical Statistics with Applications by Wackerly, Mendenhall, and Scheaffer
>Combinatorics and Graph Theory
Combinatorics and Graph Theory by Harris, Hirst, and Mossinghoff
Combinatorics: Topics, Techniques, Algorithms by Cameron
>Algorithm Analysis
An Introduction to the Analysis of Algorithms by Sedgewick and Flajolet
Analytic Combinatorics by Flajolet and Sedgewick (Sequel)
>Automata, Computability, and Complexity Theory
Automata and Computability by Kozen
Computational Complexity: A Modern Approach by Arora and Barak
Theory of Computation by Kozen
>Number Theory
Introduction to Number Theory by Hardy and Wright
A Course in Computational Algebraic Number Theory by Cohen
Advanced Topics in Computational Number Theory by Cohen
>Cryptography
Introduction to Modern Cryptography by Katz and Lindell
An Introduction to Mathematical Cryptography by Hoffstein, Pipher, and Silverman
>Information Theory
Elements of Information Theory by Cover and Thomas
Coding and Information Theory by Roman
>Abstract Algebra*
Algebra by Artin
Topics in Algebra by Herstein
