# Free 2nd year undergrad online analog electronics course

S

#### Spehro Pefhany

Jan 1, 1970
0
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 S #### Spehro Pefhany Jan 1, 1970 0 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

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

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

S

#### Spehro Pefhany

Jan 1, 1970
0
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:-

411, from Orlando, T., and K. Delin. Foundations of Applied

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

S

#### Spehro Pefhany

Jan 1, 1970
0
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

...Jim Thompson

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

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

S

Jan 1, 1970
0
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 J #### Joerg Jan 1, 1970 0 Phil said: 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

J

#### Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
Phil said:
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.

M

#### miso

Jan 1, 1970
0
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.

S

#### Spehro Pefhany

Jan 1, 1970
0
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

M

#### miso

Jan 1, 1970
0
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:

F

#### Fred Abse

Jan 1, 1970
0
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:

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

Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
595
Replies
1
Views
695
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K