MIT or Caltech or University of Chicago

collegealum314
Fri, 08 Apr 2011 01:44:25 +0000

I actually wonder, what is the difference, besides the latter I assume using the language of multivariable calculus? I think of theoretical as describing the fundamental ideas and focusing on deriving important things from first principles. The opposite would be focusing in using the statements.



It’s hard to explain and it’s been quite awhile since I took physics as you might imagine. I actually did take the theoretical version (8.012/8.022). Purcell is much more enjoyable to read. More elegant, less likely to ground the arguments in “real-world examples.” However, arguments aren’t all math but conceptual arguments are visualized in as fundamental and stripped form as possible (e.g., a particle.)

Also, Halliday has hundreds of problems in each chapter whereas Purcell (and Kolenkow, the mech equivalent) have only a few.

BTW, my freshman year 8.012 was taught by Wolfgang Ketterle, who would win the Nobel Prize a few years after I graduated.