Ask HN: Any “Teach Yourself CS”-like guides for other fields? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Any “Teach Yourself CS”-like guides for other fields?

19 pointsdho18 comments

Hi HN,

Are there any resources for self learners similar to "Teach Yourself CS", but for other fields (for example, biology or physics)?

Thanks.

View on HN

I’ve heard the following multiple times from different people, mostly in regards to other engineering and science fields. I can’t speak to how effective it is personally, though.

It roughly boils down to find a good degree program in subject and try to get information on the curriculum, books involved, etc. and follow it on your own.

Assuming this is all for personal reasons, as there’s no way you’re getting into these fields without having paid up.

Yes, it's simply for the sake of curiosity, and I don't intend to getting into these fields. My goal is to bring some structure in my learning, because currently I just pick a book here, a book there, and that doesn't feel very effective.

I guess looking at the curricula of some good degree programs is the way to go.

Here's a guide on learning physics, aptly titled "So You Want to Learn Physics...": https://www.susanjfowler.com/blog/2016/8/13/so-you-want-to-l...

Here are some old HN discussions about it as well:

8 months ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24088985

2 years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18374994

5 years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12691963

That looks interesting, thanks.

Not a book but Ray Dalio’s “How the economic machine works” is a very accessible 30 min video on how the economy functions.

"How to become a GOOD Theoretical Physicist" by the Nobel laureate Gerard 't Hooft. https://www.goodtheorist.science/

A list of resources and topics to master in order to go from zero to a rigorous grasp of string theory.

Thanks for this link.

I guess the resources there will keep me busy for the next few years: "all of this together takes our students at least 5 years of intense study".

5 years sounds low, as discussed there. Even starting with a physics degree background and this being my passion, I am giving myself 10 years to reach top standard in the sense of truly mastering every area.

I suspect the 5 years as a general reference timeframe refers to full-time students who study to be computationally competent and pass exams well, but lack deep understanding of the subject area, let alone ability to solve truly difficult or novel problems.

For someone with strong high school background following the standard academic path without any delay, it would take at least 3(bsc)+1-2(msc)+3(phd)+??(postdoc) years to become a truly independent theoretical physicist.

If you're interested in finance, the CFA has a Foundations course. I think it's online and free now.

Thanks, here is the link to the curriculum: https://www.cfainstitute.org/en/programs/investment-foundati...

Request for one of these for genetics. I want to be able to play with genes or genetics, even if it's in a sandbox.

I'd certainly be interested in one for mathematics, as i only really have a secondary (middle) school education

Usually secondary school refers to high school.

Secondary school in the UK covers from 11 to 16 which I think is middle school in the states, I could be wrong though

Each state or even district divides it differently. Where I am, 11 year olds would either be in 5th grade (primary/grade school) or 6th grade (middle school). But sometimes 5th is lumped in with middle school. Sometimes they have junior high which is something like 12-14. They usually consider high school (14/15-17/18 year olds) to be secondary school. This goes back to my grandpa's time. Most people in his generation got 8th grade diplomas for finishing primary school. Secondary school was high school, but wasn't mandatory or even that common in many places.

Not really I think.

The tools to experiment and apply contemporary computer science to useful ends are accessible.

Biology and physics lack this property.

You can get book learning in them. But not hands on experience solving real world problems. Too many gate keepers.

I agree, but which fields would you say (within and outside computing) one can dive pretty deep into via both books and hands on experience?

Art. Literature. Music.

Fields without gatekeepers at every entry point.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com