Mathematical Methods in the Physical Sciences | 
enlarge | Author: Mary L. Boas Publisher: Wiley Category: Book
Buy Used: $84.69
New (23) Used (17) from $84.69
Avg. Customer Rating: 42 reviews Sales Rank: 328078
Media: Hardcover Edition: 3 Number Of Items: 1 Pages: 864 Shipping Weight (lbs): 3.4 Dimensions (in): 10.1 x 7.2 x 1.4
ISBN: 0471198269 Dewey Decimal Number: 510 EAN: 9780471198260 ASIN: 0471198269
Publication Date: July 22, 2005 Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Shipping: Expedited shipping available Condition: Clean, nice condition. Expedited orders placed before 3 PM EST ship the SAME DAY. Automatic Upgrade to Priority Mail shipping on U.S. orders over $40. Multiple books ordered from Look at a Book in a single checkout will help you reach the $40 threshold for your free Priority Mail Upgrade! Satisfaction Guaranteed!
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description Now in its third edition, Mathematical Concepts in the Physical Sciences provides a comprehensive introduction to the areas of mathematical physics. It combines all the essential math concepts into one compact, clearly written reference.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 37 more reviews...
A little too condensed October 3, 2008 1 out of 1 found this review helpful
While this is a great book that covers all the math you'll need in undergraduate physics, if you have not taken differential equations, linear algebra, and other math courses, you will have a difficult time with this book. The author assumes you know everything already and just bought the book for a review or reference.
Each chapter outlines a semester's worth of coursework in aforementioned subjects. Boas summarizes in one chapter what other authors write in a full-length book.
This is why I say it is too condensed. I feel it would read much easier if it were a 3 volume set with many more examples. If your foundations in math are strong, however, this is a solid book to keep around for reference. I would not try to learn any of these subjects the first time from this book, though.
A great book by a great teacher July 16, 2008 I took Mary Boas' course in mathematical physics at De Paul in the late 50s. Her lectures were excellent and I learned all the math I needed as a physics major. This book is an outgrowth of her lectures, very clearly written and very comprehensive. It is intended to teach physicists how to do physics, not to teach mathematicians how to do math. In other words it is heavy on physical applications and lighter on mathematical axioms and theorems. I still use this book (I own the 2nd edition) whenever I need to refresh my knowledge of any topic in mathematical physics. Warren Wolfe
Mathematical Methods in the Physical Sciences May 25, 2008 1 out of 1 found this review helpful
A Comprehensive Reference of Math Techniques up through the Calculus of Variations
A rare math book that includes a comprehensive collection of the techniques most used across the field of the sciences, from complex numbers, to vector analysis, to ordinary and partial differential equations, up through the calculus of variations and beyond.
Each section is carefully organized with easy to understand derivations, beautifully selected examples and a graduated set of problems to be solved at the end of each section, with selected answers to many of them.
While it could easily be used as an advance math course for undergraduate science and other non-math majors, including engineers, it is solid enough to also be used as an early course for math majors. Although, I would have preferred seeing probability theory introduced twice: once in its elementary and applied form early on and then later, (as is done) in the more advance introduction to probability density functions.
That nitpick aside, this is a first class scholarly effort and a winning combination for anyone who needs an excellent reference or a refresher course in college mathematics.
Five stars.
Horrible book April 25, 2008 3 out of 5 found this review helpful
This book is one of the worst mathematical methods books i've seen. When it starts out a new subject it skims over the basics required to understand the subject, it has horrible examples, the problems dont enlighten you on the particular area of mathematics that is being studied, it briefly mentions important concepts, states theorems without proofs or even giving a reason why they stated it. Nearly half of the book is calc 2-3 + diff eq. This book is really just an engineering book, your learn how to plug numbers in and get your answer. Physics isnt about plugging numbers or equations in, its about using math to describe physical phenomena, so a deep understanding of math is needed to really grasp what's happening, and this book is horrible at it. If your looking for a good book on mathematical methods, look at Mathematics of Classical and Quantum Physics
Pretty awful from a mathematicians perspective April 20, 2008 6 out of 8 found this review helpful
While this book is very expansive and covers many areas of mathematics used by physicists, the overall structure and format of the book is weak. As a mathematician, I am used to seeing Theorem this and Proposition that with clear mathematical definitions. In this book, however, everything is explained in English and formal mathematical definitions are rarely given.
For instance, take the definition of moment of inertia: "The moment of inertia I of a point mass m about an axis is by definition the product ml^2 of m times the square of the distance l from m to the axis." Why not use mathematical notation to define this? This is just one example of a problem that plagues this book.
Reading this book and trying to use it to solve problems is difficult because you are forced to read through the author's long explanations and scattered examples. Rather than making things succinct and easy to understand, the author insists on giving long run-on examples with necessary information scattered throughout. Everything in this book would be easier to understand and a quicker reference if it was put forward in a decent manner.
There are good math-in-physics books out there: this isn't one of them.
|
|
|