As a prerequisite for another book I am reading I thought it would be a good idea to refresh my memory on electromagnetics. So I opened the Griffiths Electrodynamics textbook and started doing a random problem (2.45 in the picture attached). But after spending a few hours on it I got frustrated and gave up. I looked at the answer key and it turns out the answer uses a non-intuitive "trick" from a problem 40 problems earlier.
This is bullshit. I thought the problems would be a fast-track to refreshing my physician knowledge, but they turned out to be a big waste of time. I would have been better off just reading the text. I am pissed off that the author wasted my time like this. All the problems in the Griffiths book are similarly difficult. They just test your ability to do complicated math using non-intuitive tricks rather than testing your knowledge of physics. Totally pointless waste of time.
Anyway, does anyone know of any good resources for learning/refreshing physics knowledge? Like, a set of problems to solve, so that you don't have to reread a whole textbook? Except it should be a sane set of problems unlike the ones in the Griffiths book. I am looking to refresh my knowledge of all areas of physics (mechanics, electromagnetics, and nuclear physics).
Now that I think of it, solving physics problems is really a form of idolatry, because you are just doing complicated crap that was devised in some professor's mind.
Maybe it would be better to study something real, such as planetary orbits if you want to learn mechanics. Look at the motion of the planets, and see if you can model them with the laws of mechanics. Electricity is harder because most of the electricity we deal with is man-made.
Maybe Allen has a better theory that is simpler than the mainstream one when taking more factors into account (e.g. the lack of parallax effect). I am curious to hear Allen's explanation for the apparent motion of the planets.
If you are trying to talk about ships going over the earth's curvature, you can debunk that with a pair of binoculars, or better yet with a camera with a zoom lens. It was fairly obvious from your previous posts that you are stupid and know nothing about this or any other subject, but thanks for confirming.
This is true of most scientific questions, and Occam's razor says to just pick the simplest model. I would add to Occam's razor that one should prefer models that aren't just mathematical but also are conceptual.
That is not a correct understanding of Occam's Razor, but OK then, the simplest model of the sun is some guy dragging a chariot with burning material around the sky and this also explains historical accounts of the sun stopping, going slower or faster etc., so lets believe that. Obviously the mainstream understanding of the solar system can be immediately dismissed as it takes years of formal education coupled with a suspension of disbelief and tolerance of various contradictions to be one of the few people who have some nascent understanding of it.