While the idea itself is worthwhile, I didn't see any explanation why these books and not others were selected, and no underlying structure to the choices made by the author. He also frequently lists several books covering the same topic without mentioning how they differ from each other.<p>I have previously seen two similar lists that are in my opinion better than this one:<p>John Baez, How To Learn Math And Physics <a href="http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/books.html" rel="nofollow">http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/books.html</a><p>Gerard 't Hooft, How To Become A Good Theoretical Physicist
<a href="http://www.phys.uu.nl/~thooft/theorist.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.phys.uu.nl/~thooft/theorist.html</a>
Mary Boas' "Mathematical Methods in the Physical Sciences" is also excellent, I'm using it for a course I'm teaching. At a level where a student is comfortable with calculus it presents an overview of the many areas needed to make graduate physics courses accessible. Although intended to be self contained in principle, it also might serve as a good jumping off point to further study in a particular area.<p>For general relativity, I really recommend Sean Carroll's book Spacetime and Geometry <a href="http://preposterousuniverse.com/spacetimeandgeometry/" rel="nofollow">http://preposterousuniverse.com/spacetimeandgeometry/</a>. If it seems like a long road ahead just take it one step at a time. You'll get there.
Something like this implicitly misses the point that one of the harder things to overcome when trying to <i>do</i> theoretical physics are the details of how research is done. This is the main point of having a PhD-level adviser and research group: to be able to get through the difficult parts that require intuition and very-specific domain expertise. These are not necessarily difficult or too technical, but they are obscure (e.g. how to get MadEvent and MadGraph up and running).<p>If all you care about is learning some physics, then this is great. But to really <i>do</i> theoretical physics the best way still seems to be to have an apprenticeship with someone who already does it.
You've got to get some statistical mechanics on this list. One would have a very difficult understanding quantum field theory without at least some experience considering phase transitions in more familiar settings.<p>Feynman's Statistical Mechanics is a pleasant read:
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Statistical-Mechanics-Lectures-Advanced-Classics/dp/0201360764" rel="nofollow">http://www.amazon.com/Statistical-Mechanics-Lectures-Advance...</a><p>I used to be an experimental particle physicist, so I've certainly got some bias here, but I really think learning particle physics and the Standard Model is worth while. Halzen and Martin is a VERY good textbook and an excellent preparation for studying quantum field theory.<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Quarks-Leptons-Introductory-Particle-Physics/dp/0471887412/ref=sr_1_14?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1289392424&sr=1-14" rel="nofollow">http://www.amazon.com/Quarks-Leptons-Introductory-Particle-P...</a><p>Yes, it is expensive. But it is very well written and thorough.<p>Also, I think it's always important to mention in these conversations that most physicists don't take string theory seriously. From the outside, it looks like the exciting frontier of modern physics. But that's more about Brian Greene's skill in marketing himself than string theory's explanatory value.<p>That being said, the Fabric of the Cosmos is a good layman's survey of the modern physics landscape:<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fabric_of_the_Cosmos" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fabric_of_the_Cosmos</a><p>Just bear in mind that Greene makes a lot of claims that aren't experimentally justified in chapters 12 and onward.
Would it be possible to make such a list with free and/or libre books? The list they made is not extraordinarily expensive but not cheap either. Some are outrageous: an introduction to partial differential equations for 110 GBP?!
I didn't go through the whole list but I'd make sure to not miss out on the Feynman Lectures. Once you learn the material it's not really worth it to go back. They're nice because he gives you the story behind the equations.<p>Further down the road Laundau & Lifshitz is apparently the Bible.<p>Maybe rguzman can post his reading list...
Becoming a theoretical physicist was one of my aspirations after reading Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time (understood half of it, give or take) and being good at Physics in high school. Really appreciate the effort to categorise every steps and resources necessary to attempt this field.<p>But at the same time this is starting to seem daunting... how long would it take to go through all this material on a part-time basis? Well, my original plan was to do it after I semi-retire.
Get 'Road to Reality' -- massive 1400 page book which builds up from basic algebra all the way to string theory. Unfortunately, it is still sitting unread on my book shelf. Completing that book is one of the must-do activities in my life!