I don't know why people hate this book list, these books

>>8766793
lol

book lists in general are retarded

especially one touting itself as 'required reading', when most people will do fine without reading a single one of those books

also a bible in a science and math list is dumb

>>8766793
Congrats, you fell for the meme

if you spent your time reading all 15 of those books you'd still know no topics past freshman year of university

how to solve it is garbage

>>8766852
>freshman diff eq

>>8766856
just because a course is usually taken in 2nd year by most brainlets doesn't mean it's not freshman material

there's no a reason a freshman couldn't understand ODEs, which is clear since many first year calculus courses introduce ODEs

same thing with probablity/statistics, as far as i know most people take it in 2nd year but it's certainly first year material

>>8766793
That's such a garbage list.

>>8766872
Courses aren't rated freshman, sophomore, junior, senior based on difficulty, but prerequisites and time constraints. diff.eq is a second semester sophomore class or 1st year junior (for most engineers) because that's what the natural timeline is. Colleges start their math course progression timeline with calc 1, not 3.

>>8766875
Why

>>8766793
>Including the fucking sepples bible

lmao. At least replace it with CLRS.
Also, that reading list is state-college af.

File: 1487890672250.jpg (17KB, 542x540px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 542x540px

George Simmons Precalc = Good book
George Simmons Calculus = Excelent book
Young Physics = Classic

Why so mad people?

>>8766848
I blame this on the fact that /sci/ is filled with people who primarily identify as students or professors and care about student things. This fetishization around a few tomes is embarrassing.

>>8766793
Campbell is not a good text book because of just how much unnecessary information they throw into it to make the page count larger. You could easily cut half of the information out of chapters and have the core material fully intact.

>>8766793
it's just not a good list. a lot of those books are useless.

C++ and the Bible automatically go

>>8766936
>Young Physics = Classic

It's completely useless, I bought a copy in the first year of undergrad and I've used it once, realised it wasn't comprehensive enough for what I needed it for, and bought a dedicated textbook.

>>8766793
not familiar with most of the textbooks but was onboard until
>How to solve it
pleb tier popsci trash, gtfo with this garbage

>>8767957
Replace it with a book on haskell

>>8767957
>probably THE most influential book ever written
>automatically go

righto kiddo

>>8766848
>especially one touting itself as 'required reading', when most people will do fine without reading a single one of those books

Stop being so literal, required reading obviously means required background.

>>8767971
>realised it wasn't comprehensive enough

Duh, it's a freshman physics book. It isn't going to go in the detail of Weinberg.

>>8768071
But it wasn't even comprehensive enough for that. It's a garbage tier book.

>>8768078
It covers the same material as Resnick and Halliday.

>>8768092
Then that to is garbage tier.

>>8768064
but it's not required background either

unless all you want to be is the most well-rounded freshman imaginable and not know anything more advanced

>>8767979
solid book if you're just starting your freshman year and don't really know what real math is yet.