Re: Mike Helland Reading List

On Mar 26, 12:24 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 26, 2:09 pm, Michael Helland <mobyd...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Mar 26, 11:48 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mar 24, 3:53 pm, Michael Helland <mobyd...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mar 24, 1:47 pm, theman <genericjoe2...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Read this book and it'll give a good introduction to Theoretical
Physics and it doesn't cost that much:

Joos, Georg, and Ira Maximilian Freeman. 1986. Theoretical physics.
3rd ed. New York: Dover Publications.

Then as a gauge of how good your mathematical understanding is read
this:

Petrovskii, I. G., and Abe Shenitzer. 1991. Lectures on partial
differential equations. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.

This is a graduate level PDE book

Then just for some nice bed time reading when you have nothing to do,
oh wait you have nothing to do 24hr's a day so the time that your not
reading the book on theorectical physics you can read:

Fain, Gordon L. 1999. Molecular and cellular physiology of neurons.
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Since you like to speak about neuroscience issues that you don't know
about you may as well start reading... once you finish that I have a
library of more then 250 books and some 30+ file boxes of scientific
papers, journal articles, thesis's (masters, and Phd) on topics
covering math, physics, AI, computers.... and defense sciences....

So get started it took me 6 years, with school and work to read
roughly 70% of that material and read portions of all of it, and I
read around 1000 words a minute...

Cheers

Thanks for the information. Seems to be what I am in need of.

However, I have bills and no money.

Oh, come on. These are Dover books and available used for $5. If
you're not willing to spend $5 to learn something valuable, then
you've got the wrong hobby.

The issue is not the cost of the books.

But the cost of the time I would spend reading them.

OK, understood. Again, you'll get out of a hobby as much as you put
into it. If you have no time for a hobby, then you have to clear that
first. You will not get grant support to spend more time on a hobby
than you can already invest.





If my business profits pick up, I should have more time for reading.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0486652270/ref=pd_bbs_sr_olp_1...

Likewise, you if you're unwilling to spend $5 on background
investment, it's unlikely you'll get scientists to endorse your grant
proposal.

That's a more than fair description of the odds.

Undaunted, I look forward.

Grant proposals are not a way to get education.

How about pioneering a new field?

Actually, that's frequently done at institutions of higher learning.
Will Shortz, for example, who is the editor of the NYTimes crossword
puzzle is the only degree holder in the world in the study of puzzles.
Planetary atmospheric chemistry was created at Berkeley. Animal
linguistics was created at Santa Cruz.

But you notice that in all such cases, there were students who were
able to make the time and money investment to pursue those fields as
their main activity.



Grant review *pre-
requires* that you have sufficient background, demonstrated and
documented.

I've written more computer programs than most physicists.

If the grant is for A New Kind of Physics based on the complexity that
results from simple programs, then I have a stronger background than
most people here.

Well, then see if Wolfram will supervise your thesis work at a
university where he has some marginal affiliation.


Good thinking.
.

Quantcast