/sci/ - Science & Math

Watch the series on the subject by the user viascience on youtube.

underage b&

If you can't understand a "for dummies" book, you are much too young to be learning it

>>5670941

to understand quantum mechanics, you need to learn classical mechanics first.

you need to learn about a bunch of calculus subjects and linear algebra for it to make sense

Report submitted! This window will close in 3 seconds...

>>5670941
There's no such thing as quantum physics for dummies; you need decent college math to work your way to understanding quantum mechanics. Also who the fuck suggested you to start studying quantum physics without having basic knowledge of classical mechanics/ classical electrodyamics and electricity and magnetism

Come on, why did you just come out and straight up admit that you're a middle school student?

Even I had more sense than that when I was in middle school.

New from /b/ or something?

>>5670941
If you want to learn anything from that book, you need to at least read and have a solid level of competency with physics for dummies.
That book is anything but "for dummies", if you had just read some reviews before you bought it, you would have learnt that.

>>5670941
If you had read the synopsis you would know.
"Quantum Physics For Dummies, Revised Edition lets students study at their own paces and helps them prepare for graduate or professional exams"
>Graduate or professional exams
This is a graduate level book.

>>5671097
.cont.

As other people have commented, study mathematics right up to before the Real Analysis 'level,' because you will only get a very rudimentary understanding without it. Because if you don't, your knowledge will be pretty much useless aside from being a pretentious jagoff in order to impress fellow youngsters.

>>5670941

I'll save you the trouble with the string crap: It's not a theory. A theory can be TESTED. All this 'string speculation' produces absolutely nothing that can be tested using current or even foreseeable technology.

Read a few pop-sci books on string 'theory' and you'll start to realize they're just mumbling bulldada about things that are far too small to detect with any equipment we have or are likely to have.

>>5671098
now that I take a better look myself I can see on the cover the word "eigenvalues"....
That's kinda the opposite of dummies.
This book (cba to search it up) is probably an introduction to the cuantic world once you completed the classical part of physics and have mastered calculus III and algebra up to the tensors.
Also never ever study from books named: "sth for dummies" They are made by stupid authors who think they are so funny and cool with their stupid wanna be "simple explanations" ...there's no such thing as simple explanation...there's only math bros.

>>5671105
>nothing that can be tested using current or even foreseeable technology.
Lol dumbass you just defined what a theory is
>It's not a theory. A theory can be TESTED
I don't even...

And what's up with the string theory...bad example of what you're trying to say. Einstein's general relativity is the best example. 100 year old physics and yet we can't take it for granted since is just theory. So dont you be talking about string(which by the way contrary to the popular belief is a better theory than anything that's out there right now)

>>5671107
I just had some good laughs reading the reviews. Absolutely all of them were from people who obviously did not read the synopsis.
All 1 star reviews. I think book fails in that, no one at graduate level would study from it. No dummie would understand it.

>>5671098
I've read physics for dummies and understand calculus but when i read quantum physics for dummies the terms get muddled up and the calculations seem more messed up than half of the content on /b/.

>>5671126
that's pretty much because of the fact that is 20th century shit incomplete physics

>>5671107
Its not eigenvalues and stuff like the uncertainty principle, they're easy, its when they get further into the book i notice rather odd contradictions and confusing explanations. Okay then, any book suggestions, i really wanna understand this topic and so far I've drawn a blank when it comes to the really complicated stuff.

>>5671192
any physics text book will do
^_^

it is not THAT hard

just keep trying

>>5671192
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2h1E3YJMKfA