Free 2nd year undergrad online analog electronics course

[Spehro Pefhany]

MIT is offering a free introductory (2nd year/sophomore) undergraduate
analog electronics course.. entirely online.

https://6002x.mitx.mit.edu/


March 5, 2012 through June 8, 2012, but it looks like you can still
enroll if you want.

They expect students to be able to do basic math and physics*.

This is the text ($95 from Amazon.com) but it's NOT required.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1558607358/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_til?tag=fullspectrumcompetence-20


* Prerequisites:
In order to succeed in this course, students must have taken an
Advanced Placement (AP) level physics course in electricity and
magnetism. Students must know basic calculus and linear algebra, and
have some background in differential equations.

MIT has been at the forefront in OpenCourseWare (OCW), and this takes
it to a new level.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenCourseWare



Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 19:18:54 -0700 (PDT), the renowned

Google has it as an eBook for $80, dunno if you can buy it in Canada tho : http://books.google.com/books/about/Foundations_Of_Analog_And_Digital_Electr.html?id=lGgP7FDEv3AC

I can do many things.. but (at least relevant portions of) the book
look(s) to be online for the course, so if an e-book is okay... it's
available at no cost.

Sounds like a nutty thesis. Is this course even for EE majors?

Yes, but it is a 2nd year introductory undgraduate course.. like after
they lay a solid base of math and physics in 1st year, they can
_start_ talking about circuits.

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/#electrical-engineering-and-computer-science

It's not going to do an EE very much good unless they've forgotten
just about everything they learned.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

Thanks Sphero, that's interesting.

I've watched a bunch of the OCW videos. There are some Physics ones
by Walter Levin that are a lot of fun. (Assuming you like that sort
of thing.)

George H.

I'm starting to go through courseware on the Applied Superconductivity
(similar to 6.763).. looks like it dawned on Prof. T. Orlando that he
could get more money if he pulled his illustrations from the slides
and made you buy his book, but that's okay (unfortunately it's out of
print and a bit expensive, but I tracked down a copy).

For example:-

"Image removed for copyright reasons. Please see: Figure 8.8, page
411, from Orlando, T., and K. Delin. Foundations of Applied
Superconductivity. Reading, MA".


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

Probably the book company forced it. When I was a student there, the
prof's were notorious for handing out notes rather than you needing to
buy another book.

...Jim Thompson

Addison-Wesley.. that makes sense. I forget how much you give up when
you sign a book contract.



Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

Trust me, you don't get rich on technical book royalties. Figure $60
publisher's price times 15% times 1000 copies a year, even for a
best-seller.

Cheers

Doesn't sound so attractive considering the enormous amount of work
required. Fame, if not fortune, I suppose.

I notice he took out all the illustrations, not just the ones from his
book, but also ones he lifted from elsewhere. Probably just didn't
have the time or budget to recreate or negotiate releases for the
illustrations.

--sp


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

 

[Joerg]

Trust me, you don't get rich on technical book royalties. Figure $60
publisher's price times 15% times 1000 copies a year, even for a
best-seller.

$9k is still a nice chunk to go towards you kids' tuition.

Our pastor self-published. He sells the book through his own web site
and some other online stores. Some of those deals works in a way where
books are printed as orders come in. But unlike a certain semiconductor
company they don't wait until a huge bulk order comes in

 

[Joerg]

Considering how long writing a book takes, I'd have made about as much
money mowing lawns--at least if you only consider the royalty payments.

True, but ... some day a famous scholar will say "As Dr.Hobbs wrote 200
years ago the noise in a transimpedance amplifier can be ..."

The problem with highly technical books is that the audience that can
even remotely be expected to understand the stuff in them is so small
that you can't even sell five digit quantities.

 

[miso]

What a sad jerk you are.

Your just figuring that out? ;-)

Looking at the index, it seems like a poor way to learn circuit design.
For instance, it goes into transistors, then later on does RLC circuits.
What is this? ADD ADHD? It would make more sense to beat circuit theory
to death so that the student is on autopilot when they reach active
components.

Seriously , there is no need for this book to exist. I suppose I'm an
old fart, but Wiley has a series of basic electronics books for decades.
This is just reinventing the wheel to make money.

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

Your just figuring that out? ;-)

Looking at the index, it seems like a poor way to learn circuit design.
For instance, it goes into transistors, then later on does RLC circuits.
What is this? ADD ADHD? It would make more sense to beat circuit theory
to death so that the student is on autopilot when they reach active
components.

Seems kind of arbitrary which you do first- nonlinear or reactive
parts. Kids have the attention span of a gnat these days, so maybe
it's intended to be motivational.

Seriously , there is no need for this book to exist. I suppose I'm an
old fart, but Wiley has a series of basic electronics books for decades.
This is just reinventing the wheel to make money.

Certainly nothing new has changed in a basic textbook in decades,
though the emphasis seems less analytical and more intuitive than the
way I was taught, which was pretty rigorous. Anyway, it's not making
any money for them in this course if you use the online bits.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

 

[miso]

Two classics, both authors recent deceased:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_Kreyszig
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Samuelson

Personally, I'd stick with the texts from Wiley. Who can argue with Gray
and Meyer? MIT uses Roberge. Not a contest. It sounds like NIH:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=NIH

Answer number 7.

 

[Fred Abse]

Two classics, both authors recent deceased:

Personally, I'd stick with the texts from Wiley. Who can argue with Gray
and Meyer? MIT uses Roberge. Not a contest. It sounds like NIH:
Answer number 7.

I have Kreyszig's "Advanced Engineering Mathematics". That's Wiley.