Customer Reviews

Conceptual Physics Package Edition

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

I am a physics teacher with a degree in physics and I think this is one of the best physics texts I have ever seen. I have used it for quite a few years now, with excellent results. Hewitt packs a lot of information into the book, but teachers and students are not expected to get through it all. The extra material gives the book great applications for a wide variety of audiences, but the responsibility is on the teacher to use it in a way that is not confusing to students. This is the case with any of the standard physics texts (Halliday Resnick, Giancoli).

Anyone who discounts this book because it has more words and cartoons than equations and math problems in it has no idea what understanding physics can be. Physics has too long been abused as an applied math course, and this book is a welcome remedy for this. For a general audience, this book provides an excellent overview of the fundamental concepts that make our world run. For science-bound students, it provides an excellent conceptual foundation for a more rigorous calculus-based course where deeper understanding of the connection between math and nature can be explored.

On major fault of the book, as one reviewer pointed out, is that Hewitt includes some problems that he does not give readers the math skills to solve. If a teacher assigns these problems, it is necessary that the students have access to the supplementary material written for the text that explains this math. But as a conceptual physics text for a conceptual physics course, Hewitt's book is unparalleled.

For anyone wanting an easy approach to physics and actually understand it, needs this book. Our school sort-of uses this book once and a while, but I read and re-read every chapter to clearly understand what my teacher is talking about.

Every paragraph there are little conceptual questions you answer in you mind-- then the answer is at the bottom of the page. You can read the answer to see if you understand what the book is talking about.

Paul G. Hewitt was an artist before he was a physics teacher. All of the diagrams and pictures are in cartoon-ish style, which makes it much easier and fun(!) to read. There are even some cartoons in the book.

I agree there is not much math behind it, but this books makes you actually learn physics concepts, not memorize formulas just for the test.

This is the best textbook I have ever read and the only way I could understand what my physics teacher is talking about.

As a High School physics teacher I appreciate a text that will convey the ideas of Physics without requiring a profound understanding of Math. If you need a more advanced course -- take an AP course using an advanced book, like Giancoli's. However, if all you want is a basic understanding of the concepts of physics, this is the book for you. One important point -- a thorough understanding of this book will answer every question on the FCI (a test used by some college professors to determine their students understanding of forces in physics).

I used Conceptual Physics by Paul G. Hewitt along with a more technical university-level introductory physics book that had a lot of equations but not much conceptual explanation. I should admit that I was not very fond of physics until I started to read this book. It explained physical concepts in a simple language that was easy to understand. Although it did not cover some of the more complicated physical concept, it did cover enough material so that I could understand most of the physics equations in my other more technical physics book much better. Conceptual Physics was even exciting to read and I usually looked forward to doing so. After finishing this book, because I understood physical concepts much better, I started to read other popular physics books. Conceptual Physics is not intended to be used in a course that requires solving physics problems based on understanding equation. So it should not be used as such unless it is accompanied by another book containing equations. But if you would like to learn conceptual physics without equation, it has a tremendous value.

I am a retired engineer, but now translating technical document.
The book of "Conceptual Physics" is helpful to learn basic theory
of technical writing.

I bought this book for my high school daughter so I can't really rate it. But be aware that the lab book comes with the package edition so don't order it separately or you'll have to send it back like I did.

I've found that most of my college textbooks either draw out whatever they are trying to teach you, or go off on strange tangents (My guess is to increase page numbers, so it looks like you're getting your moneys worth). But With this textbook I was able to read through the assigned chapters very quickly, while still getting all of the important information.

As a student I find this textbook to be an excellent material choice.

This book is extremely confusing and has too much distracting information. It's sad that many schools use this as their text on physics. There is little to no math in this book to assist you, yet the review sections expect you to know the math to do the work. How is that possible? Terrible book.

FORWARD:
First let me say that this review is based on Paul's seventh edition of Conceptual Physics, which I have compared with the eight edition. I did not find any SIGNIFICANT differences, maybe some different pictures and such.


REVIEW:
This book is a great introduction to physics. It is as it claims, conceptual. This book appeals to concepts that we have about the world we experience on a regular basis, and explains physics using those common experiences. Being that this book is conceptual it does not go into the depths of mathmatics that physics can involve. This does not mean that there is no math in the book, because there is, but the math is simple.

The author's way of explaining things does not have the "I need to sound intelectual" type of sentences that you would expect in a textbook. If you have read most any other textbook you should be familiar with what these types of sentences are. They're the ones that use big words to explain a simple concept that could be stated in simpler terms and understood easier. This textbook will not leave you staring into space wondering what the sentence you just read is supposed to mean.

There are two things I do not like about the book I have, which the newer editions may have fixed, one is that the questions at the end of the chapters do not have awnsers in the back of the book. But the good thing is there are some questions asked through-out the chapters that have the awnsers clearly explained in the footnotes of the page.

The other problem which may confuse some people is how the two different formulas for ACCELERATION can be rearranged to make the formulas for IMPULSE and the CHANGE IN MOMENTUM. Below is an explanation, if you do not understand it write it down and ask a math teacher to explain it.

USE THE BELOW INFORMATION ONLY AS A SUPPLEMENT TO THE TEXTBOOK IF NEEDED

F=force
m=mass
v=velocity
t=time
a=accleration
^= delta (delta is just a fancy way of saying change in)


Impules is: F x t
Change in Momentum is: ^m x v


Accleration can be:

a=F/m or it can be a=^v/t

Since both F/m and ^v/t are equal to "a" (acceleration) they can also be equal to each other, which would be:


F ^v
- = -
m t


Now to change this into impulse and momentum you just cross multiply (imagine a giant X in place of the = symbol, the two legs end at the letters that will be multiplied by each other). This is called the MEANS AND EXTREMES property of equality. The result will be:

F x t = ^v x m or in other words impulse = momentum.

To see how this works for yourself simply replace the four letters with any non-zero number.


As a summary of this book, it offers a good summary of physics (mechanics, heat, sound, electricity and magnetism, light... etc). For those who wish to learn physics without a teacher this is an excellent book.

My daughter used this textbook in her HS physics class and I was apalled with how much useless information it contained. Little to no historical information about who, what and when it was discovered and how it brought about changed. Her teacher used the chapter on the conservation of energy to talk about energy conservation, an entirely different subject. I agree with teaching the concepts of physics in HS before diving into the math in college, but there are much better texts available!