Is there anything like "The Feynman Lectures on Physics"

sadly mathematicians are autistic and none have as much charisma as feynman, so no thing will ever exist

herbert gross's videos aren't bad

>>8919066
(((Feynman)))

>>8919066
Yes, look for "The Brainlet lectures"

>you will never get classes from Feynman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NM-zWTU7X-k

I kinda like Princeton companion to mathematics

>>8919066
>I want to learn math but with full understanding of the terms commonly used
>but with full understanding of the terms commonly used
>but

All you're implying is that you've taken a look at a proper maths lecture and found it too difficult to follow. Face it, you're a brainlet. There's no hope for you, and no "Maths for Dummies".

OP here. I see the thread got suprisingly toxic. Anyway thanks some anons for hints.
>All you're implying is that you've taken a look at a proper maths
No I am not. I never said it. I'm also not learning to have a higher opinion of myself(and if you do I feel quite bad for you).
I am just looking for an advice while choosing material for further studies. At the same time I know my basics aren't as solid as they should be so I want to improve them before going for more advanced topics.

>>8919155
yes indeed, the jews are very prominent in the sciences for their superior intellect

feynman lectures aren't even that good for learning physics though

>>8919277
>>8919175
I'm serious, decent text

>>8919066
Mathematicians are turbo autists that will pick the most incomprehensible and dense book to learn just for faux superiority, they cant grasp the concept that "simpler is better". You're better picking math books for scientists/engineers.

>>8919066
http://4chan-science.wikia.com/wiki/Mathematics#Overview_of_Mathematics

>>8919066
A single book with:

Elementary Set Theory and Logic
Group Theory
Field Theory
Linear Algebra with some Tensor Analysis
Real Analysis
Complex Calculus
Topology
Measure Theory
Differential Geometry
Probability and Statistics

and...

Some number theory
Some logic
Some combinatorics
Some analytic geometry

I think is doable, but it will never be as pretty as what the physicist have, modern physics is a lot more focused.

With Math you have some Schools that don't teach logic or number theory, is not as standard as physics.

"What Is Mathematics? An Elementary Approach to Ideas and Methods" is ok.

>>8919175
Too advanced for me.

>>8919066
You don't get it with Feynman. He was smart but the key thing was that he was good looking and socially competent. As well he actually knew who he was dealing and could adapt instead of of being as inflexible as a rock.

>>8920758
But you are slut because I buy sandwich and don't fuck me.

>>8919066
Mathematics: Its Content, Methods and Meaning by Aleksandrov.

File: 41Mmcj4TpyL._SX327_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (19KB, 329x499px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 329x499px

>>8920911
This and pic related

>I want to learn math but with full understanding of the terms commonly used.
>>8919277
I see the thread got suprisingly toxic.

I'd argue you started the shit when you were implying Feynmans books are particularly rigorous.

Feynman is someone who makes physics cool and thus, I guess, enjoyable to learn. It's not like his presentations are the most throughout ones, especially compared to math books.
t. physicist

>>8919177
The are some bad lectures out there anon. Give him the benefit of the doubt

>>8919155
Deal with the fact that a disproportionate amount of scientific talent is found in the Jews. Stop being so insecure, that's just a statistical fact that says nothing about the potential of an individual.

>>8919325
This kneegrow is right. No one gives a fuck if you can read difficult, rigorous material. The important thing is that you learn what you sought out to as easy as possible.

The problem is that this board is full of a bunch of autists that feel the need to make themselves feel superior just because they can read some retarded pure math garbage that no one gives a fuck about but them.

Pure math is just a fuckin circle jerk.

Have fun teaching shit stains about point set topology while I'm making six figures starting as an actuary.

>>8919066
Math is too broad for a text like that. Secondly math is very deep in specific subjects. Look up EGA, the legendary text on algebraic geometry by Grothendieck. It's thousands of pages long, you probably couldn't find a single person capable of reading it in hundreds of miles around you, and it still doesn't cover everything about algebraic geometry, focusing mainly on purely algebraic methods and not complex geometric ones. For that you'll need another giant textbook by griffiths and harris. Once again this doesn't cover everything about it. And to even start with algebraic geometry at all you need familiarity with commutative algebra. Which is a subject in its own right, ignoring the connection to algebraic geometry. But to even start commutative algebra you need a hefty amount of abstract algebra as well.

Now realize that all that is just one field of modern math. Admittedly one of the more difficult ones, algebraic geometry, but still. It will takes years of intense study to become familiar with just this.

Now it might make more sense why no one book exists like the Feynman lectures. You simply can't do everything in math. In the basic physics covered in Feynman, it can be motivated and organized by history. But math is often rewritten as time goes on making a historical method less effective since the important stuff back then is useless now.