Entering math through the side door I am not really good at math, I'd say I'm a lot worse than good when it comes to math but I am a programmer so I have to learn to get over that fact.
A lot of times if I want to implement some code I have to read math formulas and it might as well be written in Russian... I speak no Russian.
Let's take "perturbation theory" for example. The formula looks like this:

now I know most of those symbols so that's not too bad.
but there's some formulas with like Sigma [summation] $\sum $ notation and a whole lot of other symbols that mean things in the math, physics world that I have no idea what they mean.
Like this squiggly $f$ or $s$ looking thing in this image:
$$\int_{-\infty}^\infty \sqrt{\frac{\sqrt{x^n}+1}{\alpha+\beta^\gamma}} \, dx$$
squiggly $f$ or $s$
square root of $x$ to the $n$th power plus one divided by alpha plus theta to the (?) power times a type of $d$ times $x.$
I know this might seem like a joke but i am very sincere with this question.
Is there a book or repository where these signs are laid out with their meanings? I've googled but can't find anything except maybe these images with names but that often leaves me more confused than I started.
So is there a singular book or at least a place that I can go to reference these symbols to get their meanings?
edit
I don't think this is the same question as the one it's being marked as duplicate. I read that question and that's a very general question about how to get better at math.
That's not my question, I am asking more for a definition of terms. When you look at math papers there's often very cryptic symbols in the function. I am looking for a resource to say what those cryptic symbols mean and not generally how to do math.
I've tried to make this distinction clear. Let's use something simple for example. 
If you didn't know the rules of summation, how can you even start to decrypt what that formula means. What if you don't even know that that symbol is called sigma, where do you start?
I thought that there would be some resource for math that gave the names of those symbols and a way to use them. Back to the sigma example, if there was some resource that says that's called sigma and 
Then I can say oh okay, I got it I can figure it out from here.
So while the other question was more general about learning math, this is more directed at how do I decypher those symbols. Hopefully that makes the differences between the questions more obvious.
 A: 
So is there a singular book or at least a place that I can go to reference these symbols to get their meanings?

Without being abstract, there is, and it won't/shouldn't take more than a few months of applied effort.
Calculus: "Calculus" by James Stewart.  Read and quickly (don't waste a lot of time getting bogged down by textbook wordiness) work through Chapters 1-4; complete other sections later if/when you need.  Learn what it means to differentiate, integrate, and solve a number practice problems.
Linear algebra: "Introduction to Linear Algebra" by Gilbert Strang.  Work up to the sections involving matrix diagonalization.  Practice solving a system of matrix equations by matrix methods, and calculate some matrix eigenvalues and eigenvectors.
Complex analysis: Find a .pdf introduction to complex numbers.  Know what it means to square, and take real and imaginary parts of complex numbers.  Thoroughly understand Euler's formula.
Move quickly through these outlined concepts, and you should have enough math to e.g. understand a large part of most undergraduate physics books, as well as be able to tackle basic problems in computer graphics (where matrix methods come into play).
A: 
So is there a singular book or at least a place that I can go to
  reference these symbols to get their meanings?

Yes.  In fact, if I could rephrase your question to be

Is there a single book I can read to learn an entire undergrad math education in one go, without requiring other books or resources like the Internet, as if I was stranded on a desert island with only this one book for company?

Answer is still "Yes".  The book is Courant and Robbins' What is Mathematics?  It's a book I'd recommend alike to high schoolers and continuing education students.  It was written at a time when masterful exposition for the intelligent layman was highly respected, and it still reads extremely well.  
A: Please excuse the anecdotal introduction.
I started out as a musician (you know, music college and all that).  Much later in life I did a degree that was part mathematics - I'm proud to say I got a distinction.
Why am I telling you this? Because I sympathise.
Here is the real problem and you don't find it in many maths books. The current users of these symbols are standing on the shoulders of giants.  When a mathematical idea was first thought of there wasn't a symbol. For example, there was no symbol for zero at one time.   Some clever person saw a problem, formulated an answer and then they or a successor encapsulated it in a symbol or an equation.
The revelation came for me when I wanted to understand neural networks.  I couldn't understand the terminology. It was only when I obtained a reference book with all the original papers that I got it. I found I could easily program, e.g a Hopfield network by reading what Hopfield himself wrote. That allowed me to read other much more technical papers that followed.
My Answer
Wherever possible, go back to the source. This is easy now we have the internet. Find the person who first invented the concept and symbol and see what they said. They were as naive as anyone else when they first started.
This works for the old guys but unfortunately nowadays, many writers think it makes them look clever if they write as obscurely as possible. Avoid them and find the people who know how to teach. An excellent example would be Richard Feynman who used diagrams and taught his ideas clearly to generations of students
A: The bad news is that mathematical notation can be regarded as an incredibly dense kind of compression: you take a very subtle and carefully evolved idea and choose some symbol to represent it. The "quick meaning" of a symbol will typically lose all the subtlety. 
There's a worse problem: typesetting is a pain, so it's pretty common for mathematicians to use the same notation to mean different (although often closely-related) things, depending on context. As an example, 
$$
\int_0^1 \frac{1}{x^2} dx
$$
and 
$$
\int_0^1 \frac{1}{1 + x^2} dx
$$
denote rather different things. The first is called an "improper integral," and  as a mathematician, I notice that because I see that the integrand (that is, $\frac{1}{x^2}$) turns out to head towards infinity as $x$ approaches the lower-limit of the integral (namely $0$), but I see that the second is not improper, because the integrand is nice over the whole interval $0 \le x \le 1$. If you happened to find a book that told you how to do "numerical integration" and tried to apply the ideas to the first integral, you might well get things wrong, and never know why. 
In short: the way to learn enough math to program things responsibly is to make sure that the person who asks you to write the program either explains them to you, and how s/he wishes you to convert them to code, or to learn the math yourself. 
I'm not trying to be snarky here, but if you said "I was never good at chemistry, but I want to do home electroplating, so can someone tell me what those chemical names all mean?", you'd instantly know that this was crazy (I hope). Perhaps a better instance would be "I want to build high-power electronics, but don't understand circuit diagrams." The main difference in this case is that in mathematics, the meanings are probably more subtle and the ambiguity generally far greater, and resolved only by context. 
A: I recently bought the `Numerical Recipes' book after it was recommended to me by a physicist friend. It would probably help if you could see a mathematical formula implemented as an algorithm in order to understand what it's all about.
http://www.amazon.com/Numerical-Recipes-3rd-Edition-Scientific/dp/0521880688
A: The best way to learn math is to learn math.  The best way to learn math, as someone who knows programming, is still to learn math.
Forgive the pithy wording, but I think it captures something important: you shouldn't be learning mathematical symbols, you should be learning math.  For instance, you saw $\int$, the "squiggly f or s thing."  I could tell you that that is an integral sign, but that won't do you a lick of good unless you have the 2-3 semesters of calculus under your belt that you need to actually use the sign.  Until then, they're nothing but shapes on a page.
I went through this process learning Tai Chi recently (disclaimer: that should probably read "I am still learning Tai Chi").  I approached Tai Chi from a completely scientific perspective.  I know science.  If you can give me hard definitions for everything in your martial art, I can work with it.  I tried to apply science to Tai Chi.
Fat chance.
It worked... well.. okay, I don't even have a euphemism for it.  It failed so completely and utterly that there was almost no reason to even mention that the attempt occurred.  I needed to try a different approach.
So, instead, I chose to learn Tai Chi.  I didn't try to define Tai Chi in scientific terms; I didn't try to bound Tai Chi with probabilities.  I learned Tai Chi.  I learned what yin and yang meant not from some exotic analogy to a scientific model involving oscillating variables, but from what yin is and yang is, and how they work together.
Then, along the way, I found easier ways to do things.  I found that Faraday waves over here could do a reasonable job of approximating one type of motion, so I developed my own way of thinking about that motion which flowed fluidly from "mostly Faraday waves, with errors described using yin and yang" when I just need something rough to work with to "yin and yang" on their own when I needed to actually delve further into the real nature of the motion.  I never sought to find approximations first.  I always sought to do it right, and lean on the approximations when they helped make it easier to reach further into the art.
You should do the same with mathematics.  It sounds like you never took calculus.  Don't learn what an integral sign is: take calculus and learn integration.  You'll realize, along the way, that you actually have to learn differentiation before hand... its really easier to learn it in that direction.  If I gave you the symbols ($\int$ and $\frac{d}{dx}(f(x))$), you wouldn't even notice they are related... yet the back and forth between those two is as fundamental to calculus as variables are to algebra.
This will save you a lot of trouble.  Then, along the way, you may find a reason a programmer will want to study an Abelian group.  You'll find that you don't need calculus for that one, but if you don't have a foundation in abstract algebra (which is different from the algebra you lean in high school), the  meanings behind those symbols they use will vanish.  However, if you took the time to do just a little abstract algebra, and Abelian groups look useful, you may be able to dig into it, using your programming knowledge to hoist you past some of the difficult details along the way.
Then you really use your programmer side.  But always learn the fundamentals first, the way the discipline wants you to learn them.  Its always worth it.
A: These are all symbols that are usually learned in high school or introductory math in college. There is a wiki page that gives names and purpose for most symbols:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mathematical_symbols
Wikipedia may not be a reliable source for some topics, but with math it is usually very good for a run down in an unknown or new topic.
A: This is a deep question raising a lot of issues about mathematical education. I could discuss it at length, but I'll try and keep this to some practical advice:


*

*Learn as you go, one symbol at a time. There are countless (but not uncountable) mathematical symbols, and each with different meanings in different contexts. For example, $\pi$ is usually taken to mean $3.14\dots$ but $\pi(n)$ means the number of prime numbers less than $n$. To try and learn the meaning of every symbol in every context is futile. So I advise you to just pick it up as you go, when you need it. Don't worry about other symbols. As soon as you get what you need, use it and move on. That said, learning some basic symbols e.g. $\Sigma$ for summation might be a useful exercise for you to do over a few days if you have the time.

*Learn from people when you can. If you don't know what a symbol means, ask someone. In person is best, because they can tailor their answer to your needs and make sure you understand it. If they're good that is. If there's nobody available in person, you can search this website. If you can't find anything relevant here, don't be afraid to post up a new question.

*Break it down. When you come across a new symbol, e.g. $\Sigma$ for summation, zero in on what it means. Like a dictionary definition, define it in terms of things you already know. You've now expanded your knowledge. Try some examples. E.g. $\sum_{i = 1}^4i$ just means $1 + 2 + 3 + 4$.

*Put the time in. You can only learn if you apply yourself. You get out what you put in. Still, if you're doing it the smart way and taking it in manageable chunks, you'll learn a lot more efficiently.
If you feel bogged down trying to cram all this knowledge into your head, here's a thought: nobody in the world knows all the mathematical symbols and all their meanings in all contexts. So just learn what you need to do what you're doing. You'll find yourself naturally picking things up as you go.
A: Please forgive what should be just a comment, but is too long to post as such.  
The OP's plaint brings to mind a passage from Thomas Mann's novel Royal Highness:

What he saw made his head swim. A fantastic hocus-pocus, a witches'
  sabbath of abbreviated symbols, written in a childish round hand which
  was the obvious result of Miss Spoelmann's peculiar way of holding her
  pen, covered the pages. There were Greek and Latin letters of various
  heights, crossed and cancelled, arranged above and below cross lines,
  covered by other lines, enclosed in round brackets, formulated in
  square brackets. Single letters, pushed forward like sentries, kept
  guard above the main bodies. Cabalistic signs, quite unintelligible to
  the lay mind, cast their arms round letters and ciphers, while
  fractions stood in front of them and ciphers and letters hovered round
  their tops and bottoms. Strange syllables, abbreviations of mysterious
  words, were scattered everywhere, and between the columns were written
  sentences and remarks in ordinary language, whose sense was equally
  beyond the normal intelligence, and conveyed no more to the reader
  than an incantation.

A: There are different mathematics Handbooks that are pretty good, with that word usually in the title.  Flipping through one of them will give you a feel for the symbols and their names, and a loose idea of what subjects and searchable terms go together with the symbols.  This at least gives an entry point when you are looking for one, or a place to browse when curious.
Purely top-down and bottom-up approaches don't really work for mathematics.  The top down approach is to take a mysterious symbol, find out its definition, then the definition of all the mysterious words and symbols in that definition, and continue backtracking until there is a whole pyramid of words and symbols that ultimately build on things that are simple.  This quickly becomes ridiculous and impossible (unless you are just fascinated by the words and symbols).  The opposite approach, bottom up, is to do a self-learning adult education version of a university mathematics degree.  This may exhaust your patience and interest.
It is more sensible to follow your interests wherever they lead, picking up smaller chunks of material but connecting it to previously acquired chunks where possible.  That, done with the tools the Internet provides, is one kind of "side door".
