正如博文脚注里提到的，我觉得盖尔范德和福明的《Calculus of Variations》（变分法）把该讲的主题讲得非常清楚。沃尔德的《General Relativity》（广义相对论）读起来比较吃力，但写得极好。量子力学或 QFT 根本就没什么好教材；温伯格的《Quantum Theory of Fields》大概是最不……
As mentioned in a footnote in the blog post, I think Gelfand and Fomin’s “Calculus of Variations” is very clear on its topic. Wald's "General Relativity" is slow-going, but excellent. No good textbooks on quantum mechanics or QFT exist; Weinberg's "Quantum Theory of Fields" is probably the least…
本科时我上过一门研究生课，用的是盖尔范德和福明的《Calculus of Variations》[0]，那门课深入探讨了经典力学的数学原理，但默认学生已经掌握了相关的物理知识。我当时没正经上过经典力学课，啃这本……
In undergrad I took a graduate class out of Calculus of Variations by Gelfand and Fomin [0] that went deep into the math of classical mechanics but assumed students already knew the relevant physics. I hadn't taken a proper classical mechanics class, and working through…
正如博文脚注里提到的，我觉得盖尔范德和福明的《Calculus of Variations》（变分法）把该讲的主题讲得非常清楚。沃尔德的《General Relativity》（广义相对论）读起来比较吃力，但写得极好。量子力学或 QFT 根本就没什么好教材；温伯格的《Quantum Theory of Fields》大概是最不……
As mentioned in a footnote in the blog post, I think Gelfand and Fomin’s “Calculus of Variations” is very clear on its topic. Wald's "General Relativity" is slow-going, but excellent. No good textbooks on quantum mechanics or QFT exist; Weinberg's "Quantum Theory of Fields" is probably the least…
本科时我上过一门研究生课，用的是盖尔范德和福明的《Calculus of Variations》[0]，那门课深入探讨了经典力学的数学原理，但默认学生已经掌握了相关的物理知识。我当时没正经上过经典力学课，啃这本……
In undergrad I took a graduate class out of Calculus of Variations by Gelfand and Fomin [0] that went deep into the math of classical mechanics but assumed students already knew the relevant physics. I hadn't taken a proper classical mechanics class, and working through…