The Birth of a Textbook - Comments

[Orodruin]

It only took you $\approx 1.5$ years to get the book written. Congrats.

I am curious: how long did you think it would take, when you first started -- either as a point estimate or some kind of range bounds? I would have guessed much more than 1.5 years, but I haven't done the work and gathered any data here.

I am not sure I had an estimate. Since I was already teaching the subjects since some years I was pretty much already up to speed subject wise. I had written a bunch of lecture notes in different subjects before, so I pretty much knew that the time scale was years. Of course, it also depends on how much time one is willing to put into the project. This was essentially a hobby project that I played with for almost every day during my free time when I did not have anything better to do.

That being said, I got an idea of the time scale from extrapolation pretty early on.

(This is touching on the planning fallacy and a favorite real life error from Kahneman when he was in a group trying to create a textbook -- his group estimated 1.5 to 2.5 years to get the book to completed even though data indicated north of 7 years, and it in fact took 8 years to get said textbook to market ).

Depending on the size of the group, it may very well be possible that too many cooks spoil the broth.

 

[Wes Tausend]

Congratulations Orodruin,

I really do not know, nor can I imagine the trouble one may go to publish an entire book, an excruciatingly accurate, protracted manuscript that one hopes can long be proudly quoted here on PF or anywhere. Someday I hope too, to say something, to leave something worth remembering.

It seems I expend a great deal of effort to make a single post on PF that is anywhere near bullet-proof, and often fail. Perhaps more effort is in order for me. In that, you are an inspiration to do better just because you shared your interesting journey to build a much larger such edifice. Thanks for your insight. --Wes
...

 

[Orodruin]

Here is a heads-up to anyone who wants a shot at winning a copy: The PF Photo Contest thread featuring a copy of the book is now open for submissions.

 

[mfb]

Indeed, I always wonder, who from the ~1000 people of the big collaborations has really written the papers and how you can make everybody agree with what's written ;-)).

The actual number of scientists writing the papers is typically small - rarely more than 5 with large contributions, and they will split up the work (“X does the introduction, Y does the data selection, ...”). Afterwards you have several rounds of discussion and comments - first from other members of the analysis group, then from the larger working group your analysis is a part of (e.g. “Higgs” if you study some Higgs decay) and/or dedicated reviewers from this group, later the whole collaboration.
It is not always possible to make everyone happy. Sometimes you even get directly contradicting wishes. Choose one version and move on. Most of the 1000+ authors won’t add comments, but if the proposed paper is popular you can get 50+ sets of comments to go through.

(If this gets a longer discussion I’ll move it to a separate thread.)

 

[bapowell]

Congrats Orodruin! What an achievement!

 

[Amrator]

Congrats, Orodruin. I'm a third year physics major, and so I will definitely order a paperback (I can't afford the hardcover as of right now).

 

[vanhees71]

I've ordered it yesterday directly from the CRC website :-)).

 

[member 587159]

Congratulations! I can't imagine how time-consuming it must have been to write such a marvelous book, containing years of expertise and knowledge. I hope the hard work pays off well!

 

[Orodruin]

I can't imagine how time-consuming it must have been to write such a marvelous book

How do you know it is marvelous?
(Although I did my best, I think I will let others judge that ... )

 

[Astronuc]

I like to TOC:

Vector analysis.
Tensor analysis.
Modelling physical systems using PDEs.
Function spaces.
Series and transform solutions.
Green’s functions.
Variational calculus.
Calculus on manifolds.
Classical mechanics.
Electrodynamics.
Special and general relativity.

Reference https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/the-birth-of-a-textbook/

I could have used such a book more than 40 years ago. Instead, I had to sit down with the university course catalog and figure out which mathematics courses I need in parallel with the physics courses I wanted to take. As far as I know, there was no coordination between the mathematics and physics departments, although I think the applied math group coordinated with physics and other sciences somewhat. The lack of coordination between physics and math frustrated me in high school, because it seemed clear that one had to be proficient in calculus to apply it in physics. I had to a lot of self-study early on.

 

[Orodruin]

I like to TOC:

Vector analysis.
Tensor analysis.
Modelling physical systems using PDEs.
Function spaces.
Series and transform solutions.
Green’s functions.
Variational calculus.
Calculus on manifolds.
Classical mechanics.
Electrodynamics.
Special and general relativity.

Reference https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/the-birth-of-a-textbook/

Note that this is not the actual table of contents. It was the intended contents in my first draft. Since then I removed electrodynamics and relativity and added a chapter on group theory. The actual table of contents can be found on the CRC Press homepage. However, I have attempted to use examples from relatively basic physics throughout the text.

 

[member 587159]

How do you know it is marvelous?
(Although I did my best, I think I will let others judge that ... )

I read the insights article! Of course, I didn't read the book (yet), but let's consider it an educated guess, considering what I know from the forums ;)

 

[nomadreid]

I note that the book was relabeled from "introductory" to "for graduate students or advanced undergraduate students". I presume that means in physics. If one is not a physicist, how much mathematical background is necessary to be able to follow the explanations?

 

[Torg]

I am happy you wrote a book. I think it will be an excellent and very useful book. Congratulations!
Does the book discuss tensor analysis, or could i read the contents?

 

[Orodruin]

I note that the book was relabeled from "introductory" to "for graduate students or advanced undergraduate students". I presume that means in physics. If one is not a physicist, how much mathematical background is necessary to be able to follow the explanations?

To follow everything, you would need to be proficient in multivariable calculus, linear algebra, and introductory courses in differential equations. Complex analysis will also help at some points. The text is written with a focus on the physics applications of the mathematics. Most of the physics used (that is not introduced specifically) also relies on relatively basic classical physics. Of course, the difficulty varies from chapter to chapter and the first few chapters should be rather accessible with just calculus and linear algebra.

Does the book discuss tensor analysis, or could i read the contents?

Yes. Tensor analysis in a Euclidean space (but in general coordinates) is included in chapter 2 and calculus on manifolds is covered in chapter 9. A list of chapters is available on the CRC Press homepage (there is a link at the bottom of the Insight).

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

CRC Press tweeted the release today
https://twitter.com/CRC_MathStats/status/949241598625411073

 

[dfan]

For anyone wanting a preview of the content, Amazon now has the "Look inside" feature for this book, although it is only of the Kindle version and therefore looks rather ugly.

 

[Orodruin]

For anyone wanting a preview of the content, Amazon now has the "Look inside" feature for this book, although it is only of the Kindle version and therefore looks rather ugly.

Indeed. I am pretty sure the printed version looks much better, at least my print-ready pdf does, and that this is auto-generated. Solely based on the number of equations, this is about one third of the first chapter.

@Greg Bernhardt has seen the copies used for prizes in the photo and haiku/limerick contests and should be able to confirm. I am hoping my author copies have arrived when I get back to work after the holidays on Monday.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I am pretty sure the printed version looks much better

Yeah the amazon preview is a sloppy rendering. Everything is seamless in the print version. The publisher wouldn't print the amazon render. I sent amazon a 5 star review. Hopefully they print it!

 

[mfb]

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/R1WL37LPSI/?tag=pfamazon01-20

A 5.000 rating for the book! It won't get a better average!

 

[strangerep]

I sent amazon a 5 star review. Hopefully they print it!

Amazon shows this as being rated by someone "especially interested in"... cat supplies.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Amazon shows this as being rated by someone "especially interested in"... cat supplies.

Guilty, I have a cat

 

[strangerep]

Guilty, I have a cat

Oh, don't get me wrong -- I like cats too. It just seemed quite funny mentioning that for a book about mathematical methods.

 

[mfb]

Well, with a dataset of 1 the conclusions drawn are not the best.

 

[Orodruin]

Oh, don't get me wrong -- I like cats too. It just seemed quite funny mentioning that for a book about mathematical methods.

It would have been more appropriate for a book on quantum mechanics. Or not. We won’t know until Greg reviews a QM book.

 

[vanhees71]

Indeed. I am pretty sure the printed version looks much better, at least my print-ready pdf does, and that this is auto-generated. Solely based on the number of equations, this is about one third of the first chapter.

@Greg Bernhardt has seen the copies used for prizes in the photo and haiku/limerick contests and should be able to confirm. I am hoping my author copies have arrived when I get back to work after the holidays on Monday.

Well, I never understood, why the publishers offer technical books in epub formats with the formulae put in the lowest possible resolution. It discredits the entire book, if you ask me. Why don't they use pdf, which gives everything in very good quality (provided it's typeset correctly with real vector fonts rather than also using png or even worse jpg for formulae). Some textbooks by Springer are offered in pdf and epub. You can see the nonsense of epub by simple comparison of both formats. Never ever buy a textbook in epub format! I prefer to have both, a paper copy and the ebook as pdf. Sometimes you get this ideal combination, i.e., buying the paper copy you get the pdf ebook for free too.

 

[vanhees71]

It would have been more appropriate for a book on quantum mechanics. Or not. We won’t know until Greg reviews a QM book.

Well, quantum physicists are known to be notorious cat tormentors, confining the poor animals in boxes and prepare a state, where the cat is in superposition of dead and alive. Even worse are experimenters, who tend to really open the box to check whether the cat is alive or dead, causing an instantaneous collapse of the poor creature (at least if they believe in naive interpretations of QT contradicting its very foundations ;-)).

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

We won’t know until Greg reviews a QM book.

Let me know when your book on QM is published

 

[Telemachus]

Congratulations @Orodruin! I really appreciate and have a big estimate for this user, who is always helping in the community. It is also amazing to read the testimony of how it is tu publish a book. Congratulations again, and thanks for sharing!

 

[vanhees71]

I had now 1.5 days to "diagonal read" through @Orodruin 's book. It's just marvelous! That's the kind of book, I missed in the early semesters to learn the math necessary for physics (most importantly vector calculus, i.e., div, grad, rot and Gauss's and Stokes's integral theorems) before the math lectures provided us with this material. It's written in a very clear and concise way, emphasizing the fundamental ideas and also the calculational techniques needed by any physicist from the very beginning. When I've read a bit more systematically through some chapters, I'll write a more complete review at Amazon (of course with 5 stars :-)))! It's just great!

 

[smodak]

Is there a 'look inside' or sample chapter(s) available anywhere now/

p.s. never Mind. I see amazon has the look inside available now.

 

[Orodruin]

It's just great!

Happy you like it. It means a lot.

Is there a 'look inside' or sample chapter(s) available anywhere now/

p.s. never Mind. I see amazon has the look inside available now.

The look inside on amazon is the kindle version, which I believe is auto generated from the pdf. This does not always work out very well. The actual text is much better typeset.

 

[vanhees71]

Yes, the typeset of the printed book is fine. I wonder, why they don't provide a pdf version as "e-book". Springer offers pdf's and sometimes epub or kindle or whatever, and it's horrible.

 

[Orodruin]

We had three amazing contests where the winners each won a copy of the book. Congratulations to the winners and thanks to everyone who participated! I wish we had more books to give away!

The contests and winners were:
PF Photo Contest, Physics+Maths (voting thread) - Winner: @Andy Resnick
Haiku/Limerick Contest - Winner: @kuruman
Educational Experience Account - Winner: @Dr.D

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I wish we had more books to give away!

Time to start your next book