Nuclear physics:

>>8443142

faggot

>>8443142
Why the fuck do you need a trip code for this? Kys

>>8443142
more?
It would take years of continuous full time study to absorb the material in all of those books
Why are you wasting time adding to a list of books you already won't finish when you could be reading one and getting closer to your goal?
I'd bet everything I have that you don't complete a single one.

>>8443818

>projecting

Sad...

>>8443142
>Plasma physics by piel

meh. had to use this as a supp. text in plasma physics, not my bag.

For a better generalized introduction go with Chen

https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-plasma-physics-controlled-fusion/dp/0306413329/ref=pd_sbs_14_t_2?ie=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=KQ00HX022C1YN99BS6P2

Fusion research by Dolan I've heard mixed things about but it;s worth a read

Shankar is the bomb for quantum. I got stuck with that Griffiths bullshit in school and ignored it altogether except for homework.

Martin and Shaw Part. Phys. is pretty bro-tier as well.

Morrison's Modern Physics is a mixed bag. Given the level of your other texts I'm not really sure what you're hoping to get out of it. if you need it as an intro to the rest then there is a ton of shit you're missing between point A and B, mainly a detour to EM by Griffiths followed by electrodynamics by Jackson, a solid read through the venerable text of Mary Boas, and a decent stat-mech course. that's at the minimum. a good intro solid-state book would probably be good in there, your understanding of that "Ion-Solid interactions" will virtually be Nil without it.

a lot of the rest are engineering texts so I;m not as familiar, and this isn't really the direction I went, so no idea, but given what I do know it kinda seems like a directionless mess to be honest. you need more of a . . . syllabus, if you will, here.

>>8443142
Choose one.
Read them.
Do the exercises.
Ask questions in forums.

Don't collect resources. There's no single best book.

>>8443810
To stop idiots, like yourself, claiming to be OP and proceeding to derail the thread.

>>8443798
For what? Do you have any of value to add? Doubt it.

>>8443818
>It would take years of continuous full time study to absorb the material in all of those books.
How and why? It is all straightforward logic.

So, what the fuck is wrong with /sci/, a board about STEM and yet when you ask for advice, from those who are apparently knowledge of the subject you get berated for asking for source material. You three are useless cunts and have no purpose on this board.

>>8443832
Too true.

>>8443845
Thank you, anon, for actually being of some help.

>>8443916
I guess, I just like to hedge my bets.

>>8443932
compare a board like /sci/ to a board like /fit/. People on /fit/ arguably have easier to attain goals than people on /sci/- lifting isn't all that hard if you have the ability to put time into it. the kinda goals that people on /sci/ have are difficult, no matter what anyone says, and most people on /sci/ are average people struggling to fulfil above average goals.
/fit/ has a supportive community willing to give advice, whereas /sci/ has the most caustic community on 4chan, readily attacking anyone they see actually going out and doing what they ought to be doing.
/lit/ and /sci/ aren't very different at all.

>>8443946
Nobody like nuclear engineering on /sci/.

>>8443142

lol you are so stupid op kys

>>8444553
>Not an argument.
Boy, you sure got me, anon. Oh, wait, you didn't. Try again?

>>8443932
you're welcome for what it's worth. How much experience in physics do you have? I could give you a a bit of a reading syllabus to get you up to a rough, core-only undergrad level, you would have to ad lib from there, unless you want to go optics, in which case I can get you all the way.

File: 41Q8S5BX8CL.jpg (25KB, 357x475px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 357x475px

If you don't know Knoll you don't know knothing.

>>8444584
>>Not an argument.
double kys

You can't be serious.

This textbook list meme needs to die.

No one works through dozens of textbooks like that you freshman faggot. No one. You're like the little kid who thinks he's going to get buff by doing a couple pushups before bed and no one can tell him otherwise.

Just get the standard textbook for a subject, work through it, use maybe one or two other similar level books to explain certain things or for different examples. Then move on.

Between real life as well as all the math and other physics you should be learning, you're going to have far more than enough to do. You'll never even touch a quarter of those textbooks, nor should you ever want or need to.

Lastly, stop believing every stupid thing you see on here. A good 90% of these idiots are freshmen like yourself. Seriously, go take your list to your professor and he'll laugh in your face, pick one or two, and then tell you to junk the rest.

>>8443932
Kek, right. Sure. God forbid someone pretends to want a different type of book.

>>8445548

I don-t disagree with you, but the image OP posted seemed to have lots of different subjects IMHO