[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 36 KB, 360x499, griffiths-QM.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9745734 No.9745734 [Reply] [Original]

What am I in for?

is this the same author who wrote that E&M book with a reputation for being insanely difficult?

>> No.9745740

>What am I in for?
A bad time since Griffiths is a lousy expositor.

>is this the same author who wrote that E&M book with a reputation for being insanely difficult?
No, that's Jackson.

>> No.9745784

>>9745734
shit book aimed at engineers

>> No.9745898

>>9745734
A bad book. Shankar and Townsend are better introductions, which is the purpose of Griffiths. Cohen-Tannoudji and Schwabl are better references. Sakurai and Weinberg are better advanced books.

>> No.9745977

>>9745734
Be prepared for Griffiths uncertainty in chapter length principle.

His em isn't hard. They're about the same in difficulty imo.

>> No.9746038

>>9745898
what do you think about Landau Volume 3?

>> No.9746060

>>9745977
Not OP but I have his E&M books md it looks fine. Am I just a brainlet or am I in for a good summer?

>>9745734
Also, I didn’t like his Quantum book.

>>9745898
I took quantum already but don’t feel I learned much if anything, which of those would you recommend? Samurai looks good

>> No.9746129

>>9746038
I don't like it. I don't like any of the series actually, though the mechanics book is alright. It's similar to my opinion on Dirac's book. Very influential, but too old now. Tons of people love them though so I'm sure there are good insights within, but I was never able to learn much by actually reading them myself.

>>9746060
Griffiths EM book is good. I don't like how he puts problems within the chapters and I wish more of them were worked out as examples. I think it's better than Purcell and Wangsness's books at least.

Shankar and Townsend are good introductions. Though because they feel the need to be comprehensive they have chapters on material not relevant to their perspective and thus aren't very good. Townsend especially isn't very helpful for the second half. Sakurai has some very good insights, but it suffers the same problem, amplified even more by the fact that Sakurai himself died before finishing it and it was pieced together by someone else, so the organization is very poor making it impossible for beginners to read. Cohen-Tannoudji is basically perfect, the only problem is that it covers far too much material relegating it to reference only. Schwabl works out tons of stuff concretely, extremely helpful for when I needed to write any papers involving quantum mechanics. Weinberg follows his perspective and only his perspective on quantum mechanics, which makes it valuable as his perspective is much higher than any of the books listed, just read his chapter on spin for example, but this also makes it unsuitable for beginners.

>> No.9746139

>>9746060
I took two semesters of EM and a semester of quantum using each book respectively. His problems are good to work on and he develops the necessary math as he goes. Doesn't hurt to review multivariable calc and ode as you go along though.

Some of his conventions are a little odd, but he does it to provide a solid foundation for the material. You're free to use other notation, just know your answers may vary slightly from his.

Speaking of which, his soln. Manuals are easy to find.

>> No.9746163
File: 12 KB, 160x196, 160px-Complete_Guide_to_Heraldry_Fig336[1].png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9746163

>>9745734
A cat with a raised paw is heraldic symbology. Interesting...

>> No.9746183

>>9745734
At the time, I really liked Griffiths approach to QM. I am in the minority. I soaked it up like a sponge.

However, looking back, this book does little to prepare you for big boy QM. I wish I had laid my QM foundations with a different book.

>> No.9747405

>>9745734
Just get Sakurais or Landaus book on qm, Griffiths is shit.

>> No.9747408

>>9746060
His EM book is great

>> No.9747410

>>9745898
God damn it, I have to finish the Sakurai some day, but it's still kicking my ass.
I understand why he was angry at students all the time given how high his expectations are.

>> No.9747552

I like Griffiths as a first exposure, but be aware that it borders on pop-sci at times. Once you've worked through Griffiths, immediately follow up with Sakurai or similar to get into the "real" stuff.

>> No.9747610
File: 42 KB, 381x499, 51fxpQFwjnL._SX379_BO1,204,203,200_-1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9747610

It felt like a pretty good introduction at the time, but it meant a lot of adjusting to different conventions when I got to QFT with pic related

>> No.9747632

>>9745734
Is this book good for mathematicians as well?

>> No.9747639

>>9746060
>Samurai looks good

>> No.9747645

>>9747632
Get Szekeres Modern Mathematical Physics.