So is this the official approved Veeky Forums reading list?

for underage b&s to read before posting here.

>trash the whole list and start again

>still not providing any argument as to why the list is bad

Opinion discarded.

Can we stop with the textbook threads? Use the recommended text, do the problems, ask questions to the TA. That's all you need to do.

There are many ''recommended texts'' on many different topics on OPs list, whats wrong with it? Did you even bother to look at it?

I'm not saying the list is bad, just that it's the basic prerequisite material everyone on Veeky Forums should already know.

> Lang
shit. use Gelfand
> Keisler
For retards. Use Spivak if you're slightly competent. Pugh or Tao if you're more so.
I guess if you're a retard, Keisler is fine.
> Young
Gen phys books are always shit.
Use Hartog for basic mechanics.
Move on to any of the freshman classical mechanics books.
> Stroustrup
C++ a shit.
book looks fine though
> Oxtoby
> Carroll
No comment
> Horowitz
> Cambell
Good books
> The Bible (any version)
Shit book. Start with the Greeks
> Meyer
Looks like engineering shit. Engineering shit without decent applications.
> Simmons
I prefer Zill
> Bereken
no comment
> 3 books on basics of proofs
shit
check the archives

>implying Jews don't hate Xians and wouldn't do everything to rid the world of them

Campbell Biology is shit.

>Zill

Are you talking about pic related?

I have it, never really bothered to try it tho, is it good?

>doesn't even provide a (you)
You magnificent son of a bitch

is that c++ book the best

Its good from what little I read, it's praised by most on the programming generals over /g/

It's short, and if you're just doing applications of differential equations, you shouldn't need too long a book.
Most differential equations you'll end up solving will be linear anyway.

This nigga knows

>Any Veeky Forums reading list
>No Landau

lol

Tell me about this Landau guy

are his books good?

>Needing two entire books on proofs
The fuck kind of brainlet shit is this?

They're considered the best in physics, but they're graduate level books.

Personally I prefer more mathematical books like Arnold, Marsden, Chorin...

>yet another "freshman wastes hours compiling a list of books he's never going to read" thread

>projection

So what if I am a complete retard and would like to learn physics from the ground up? Do you recommend those you just listed?

>Lacking Organic/Biochemistry/polymers/ Recombinant Protein production/Biotech
Shit list 2bh

>implying it's any less true even if I am

First time I hear about that biological physics book. Is it any good?

Unless you've been versed in Biochemical functions in and out its a load of jargon

If you're a literal retard, I'd recommend watching pop-sci shows like Carl Sagan's Cosmos.
But if you're merely a Veeky Forumstard, maybe something like Hartog's mechanics book.

>C++ book
>not The C Programming Language

Bjarne Stroustrup is a shitty author. Despite being the creator of C++ originally, there are far better texts on C++ than the ones he has written.

>Bible
troll harder

>t. person who has never tried his magnus opus the c++ prog language

so is anyone gonna post the definitive list or what

...

...

whoops. posted it here.

Rudin - Mathematical Analysis
Artin - Algebra
Munkres - Topology
Morin - Classical Mechanics
Chorin - Fluid Mechanics
Marsden - Elasticity
Shankaar - Quantum Mechanics
Tong - Statistical Physics

Wait I sure hope you are not implying theres something wrong with those texts right?

Demon haunted world was goat.

>Landau's series next to a shit chem 101 book I've never heard of
The laziness makes me madder than anything else
weak af bait/10

>Oxtoby
>shit
(You)

I've read it. It's bad. Especially so if you like to stay up to date with modern languages and practices like a decent human being.

the ridiculously fast paced and almost unreadable rudin along with the silly, slow munkres? yeah, no. change it to Tao-Munkres.

>unreadable rudin

t. brainlet

Gelfand is absolute garbage, all 3 of his books

Spivak is terrible for learning calculus. Rigor doesn't make a good book, retard. If you want something that's a good calc book AND more rigorous than Spivak, do Courant.

Campbell is horseshit jesus christ dude what the fuck

>Zill
I'm done

Kill yourself, you dumb freshie

t. Freshman that fell for the meme

>no arguments

Ok...

> Rigor doesn't make a good book, retard.
> more rigorous than Spivak
didn't say it was rigorous, retard.
Courant is absolute shit, worse that Spivak and Apostol both.
Can't believe you can stand that.

More like someone who's actually been through analysis?
Rudin's a great book if you know what you're doing.

>Courant is absolute shit
Nice meme, faggot. Was it too hard for you? Is proper pedagogy not quite your taste?

And of course I'll bring up the rigor meme. The only reason why people praise that god awful book is because of impressionable brainlets like you that get led astray by Veeky Forums and physicsforums.com into thinking that it's the be-all end-all of introductory calculus/analysis, when it can't even handle one correctly. The only thing Spivak is good for, is for identifying the memers like you.

And Apostol is good, too.

what's so bad about courant

>make a long list of books
>post it on Veeky Forums
>feel smart
>never read the books

Not him, but I actually did fall for the Rudin meme as a freshman.
Went to the campus bookstore and got a copy of Rosenlicht for ten bucks, read them together, and stopped having problems.

Those books are trash

Don't be a cunt for red oxtober, mate.

babby's first books

Fixed

Cooking some meth?

>Marxist
>Druggie

Why aren't I surprised

When are you faggots going to post the REAL reading list?

>>Druggie
Huh?

>chemistry

ew

>bible

fucken what?

It's an academic study bible.

Bumping for this.
I'm gonna ask - Is there any good reading list for getting better fundamental knowledge on diverse subjects on which whole of sci can get a general consensus?

Bumping for this too.

Brainlet here and I'd like to get into physics and mathematics, but I only have the will to learn and elementary knowledge of the two.

Get young and freedman for physics for diverse knowledge

Pinter's algebra is made for brainlets and really easy to understand

If you want more specialised physics, both the electrodynamics and quantum mechanics book by Griffith's is also for brainlets

Calculus by spivak is also intro real analysis for brainlets

I'm reading through it right now. What's wrong with it?

Thanks, brainlet.

>Pinter's algebra

No. If you want abstract algebra for children then get one of these
Veeky Forums-science.wikia.com/wiki/Mathematics#Group_Theory_Teaser

Veeky Forums-science.wikia.com/wiki/

Thanks, user. It's a huge list and will take a lot of time but it's worth the effort, I presume. I'm in highschool right now.

Holy shit you're a fucking retard. I've never witnessed a bigger dumbass than you.

This is the best desu. It provides a well-rounded collection of accessible writing.

by the way, if you're looking for Veeky Forumsence fiction you can not do better than Hitchhikers Guide. You'll have a towel on hand forever after.

P.S. 42

Don't listen to this guy

Smith's Introductory Mathematics: Algebra and Analysis is a nice gentle intro to rigorous proof-based math with an unusually broad scope for its level.

Here's the official Veeky Forums list, in the only subject that matters.
>Basic Mathematics by Lang
>Calculus: A Physical Approach by Kline
>Calculus by Spivak
>Literally any intro linear algebra textbook that focuses on computation
>Literally any intro differential equations textbook that focuses on computation
>How To Prove It by Velleman
Are you ready? Here comes the first drop off.
>Linear Algebra by Hoffman and Kunze
>Literally any intro complex analysis text with a focus on computation
>Literally any discrete mathematics text with a focus on computation
Here's the second drop off!
>Principles of Mathematical Analysis by Rudin
>Topology by Munkres
>Complex Analysis by Stein and Shakarchi
>Linear Dynamics and Chaos by Strogatz
>Literally any text on ODEs with a focus on computation
>Literally any text on mathematical modeling
>Introduction to Enumerative and Analytic Combinatoris by Bona
>Real Analysis by Stein and Shakarchi
>Lectures in Algebra by Elman (or Algebra by Artin if you want something easier)
>Numerical Methods by Burden and Faires
>Differential Geometry by Petersen
>Notes on Set Theory by Moschovakis
>Absolute C++ by Savitch
>Algorithm Design by Kleinberg
>The C++ Programming Language by Stroustrup
>Machine Learning and Pattern Recognition by Bishop

There's nothing explicity here on probability, but you'll know your way around if you finish this stuff.

>Bona instead of Stanley
>Moschovakis instead of Jech
>Elman/Artin instead of a book for each algebraic theory
this list might get you to the end of your first year but then what?

For at least two of your greentext statements, I know that you don't know what you're talking about.
After these textbooks, you can apply for graduate school.

maybe a very low-tier graduate school, but certainly nowhere respectable

>not even the most elementary number theory
>nothing past basic topology
>no homological algebra
>not a single synthetic subject listed (i.e. algebraic geometry)

God damn. Some of these books in the list are extremely good but the collection is not perfect.

Whatever you say, kid :^)
Algebraic Geometry, Homo Algebra, anything beyond that Basic Topology, even a single text in Number Theory specifically - those things are entirely unnecessary to get into a good grad school. If you're trying for something specific, then perhaps your application would benefit from having those additional texts. Of course, an application would include things other than textbooks, too.

Marxists, Socialists, Jews and antitheists need to stop polluting this mongolian science preservation board.

Thanks for being useless. Enjoy what's left of your career

???

>>Literally any discrete mathematics text with a focus on computation

EPIC FAIL

>list of books i will never read but pls tell me how smart and motivated i am because of what i listed
Oxtoby - Principles of Modern Chemistry
Stewart - Calculus: Early Transcendentals
Halliday - Fundamentals of Physics
Solomons - Organic Chemistry
Nelson - Lehninger Principles of Biochemistry
Tenembaum - Ordinary Differential Equations
Lay - Linear Algebra and Its Applications
Patrick - An Introduction to Medicinal Chemistry
Bishop - Group Theory and Chemistry
Levine - Physical Chemistry
Harris - Quantitative Chemical Analysis
Miessler - Inorganic Chemistry
March - Advanced Organic Chemistry
Spessard - Intro to Organometalics
(forgot the author name) - Introduction to Strategies for Organic Synthesis
Yuru Yuri

you forgot this

Is this astrophysiscs book really good?

babby tier books

Apart from subjects listed in this book what areas of math should a modern theoretical or mathematical physicist know? Like topology, etc.

Veeky Forums-science.wikia.com/wiki/Physics_Textbook_Recommendations#Mathematics_Resources

winrar

this desu senpai not a mathematician don't know or care about the math books everyone's talking about here. What's wrong with Campbell, the prose is clear, it contains enough info, the illustrations are very pretty

>it contains enough info
Not for everyone. That's the real sticking point here, it's fairly elementary and watered down to stretch out the page count.
It's certainly good enough for many purposes, and I think its popularity as an assigned text for introductory bio attests to that. But for motivated self-study with a direction in mind and any real preparation you'd reach for something else, denser and more substantial.
It's just fine for general interest reading, and it can pinpoint what you're most interested in pursuing further, though there are more efficient ways of going about that

>March
>not Carey-Sundberg
Yeah keep cucking for the hardcover jew, fampai

Rather than Campbell what would you suggest then?