What's your opinion on this book /sci/? (Aside from the pricetag, which i agree its overpriced)
I'm in my second year of undergrad and we have our own course, which is written by our professor in dutch, however you can clearly see he based his work on this book. (same chapters, similar content etc).
Personally I like the approach and find the book quiet good if you have access to a assistent who can help you if you're stuck on a problem and if you try to work out all the problems in book.
>>7747205
I don't like the organization. IMO a QM book should start off with dirac notation, quantum states, etc. And build its way to the Schrödinger equation and the concept of a wavefunction.
>>7747217
this.
still a great book though
>>7747205
You can download the solutions manual on libgen, I can provide the pdf if you cant access it
>>7747205
>What's your opinion on this book /sci/?
It sucks. Handwavey pseudo-QM aimed at American high schoolers with no math background.
>>7747205
Some of the problems are a bit heavy with tedium. Others I've talked to have disliked it for a large focus on solving differential equations to get wavefunction solutions vs. more operator formalism viewpoint.
It was a decent first book in QM for me, having working through it in its entirety. It will prepare you for a graduate course in QM and acts as a solid foundation for other courses which will build off basic QM. One thing I would emphasize is reviewing spin and spin representations until you truly feel comfortable with it. I think the book kind of rushed through it to get to everything else.
>>7747247
Do you have any recommendations?
>>7747308
Shankar
>>7747269
Definitely agree that spin representations was rushed. Luckily Our professor wrote his own notes on momentum addition, which sadly isn't covered in the book.
>>7747205
I liked it.
It gives you an easy approach
>>7747205
all you need is our boy Wim's notes my friend
>>7747434
who?what?
Can you give link to these notes or something? I'm curious :)
>>7747440
I was guessing your professor but I think I fucked up.
>>7747308
Try Townsend's book.
>>7747447
Bruh >50% of QM classes use this book.
>>7747611
No, he probably reasoned that we had the same professor because we both speak dutch and their arent that many dutch speaking universities
>>7747205
>the T""""""""""""U"""""""""""" Delft
>>7747308
You can start Shankar after you've done LA it's very self contained and written for both self-study and a full course, accessible to undergrads despite being a considered a graduate textbook.
>>7747205
Like all of Griffiths books, it sucks in the beginning and gets better towards the end. His particle book is a perfect example. The first half of the book is unnecessary, or should be learned after the last few chapters
Use this book. Its a great introduction to quantum, and there is no lack of proper mathematics.
>>7747661
Where does one get the solutions for this book?
>>7747666
This book actually contains a set of problems that are solved right afterwards, so its good for that. However, I dont believe I have a solution to the rest of the problems. Im sure you can still find a copy of the book online though, even though libgen is all fucked.
>>7747674
Yeah, its easy to find the pdf version. But I can't find the solutions. I really prefer books with complete solutions. Especially since a lot of the other good QM books do have solutions out there (Sakurai, Griffiths)
>>7747687
You should really not be looking at solutions it creates a false sense of understanding.
It's far healthier to doubt your answers than to look at the solution to checklist it. I know this is a really hard thing to do, but if you have the discipline try to limit looking at solutions.
>>7747706
I 100% agree with you, but like you said yourself:
>doubt your answers than to look at the solution to checklist it
You have to have the answers to checklist it. If you don't have the solutions, you can't check afterwards to make sure you really got the problem right and that you understand all of the nuances of the problem.
>>7747308
Since no one else has mentioned it, "Quantum mechanics, a modern development" By Ballentine is a pretty nice book. It's pretty much what >>7747217 wanted, it's starts off with Dirac notation, vector spaces and the like, before using these to formulate QM. The third chapter is pretty interesting (imo) in that I've never seen it before in a QM text, here Ballentine derives the linear and angular momentum rules using group theory. I'd tell you more about it but I've not gotten any further.
It should be accessible to anyone with an undergraduates worth of knowledge, but I don't think I'd use it for self study without first going over a more basic book like Griffiths.
>>7747644
im from belgium breh not goin to TU-Memes
>>7747737
Nice meme *respectfully tips fedora*
>>7747205
It's shit after chapter 4. Read Shankar instead for your 2nd/3rd yaer QM class.
