Book for graduate solid state physics

[dRic2]

Hi, I have to study for a solid state physics course and I'm not sure what textbook would be the best. Our professor suggested "Principles of the theory of Solids" by Ziman, or "Solid state physics" by Ashcroft. I'll intend to use both: one I buy, the other one I borrow from the library. But which one to buy ? Also I noticed that our professor didn't assign any exercise during the course... Is It normal for a grad physics course ? I'm majoring in nuclear engineering so I do not really know how a physics grad course should be. I intended to do some problems but Ashcroft's book doesn't contain problems. Is it good or bad ? The exam is an oral examination.

Thanks
Ric

 

[Dr Transport]

Ashcroft has problems, Ziman doesn't. Both are classics and should be part of a library collection. Flip a coin...

 

[ZapperZ]

I intended to do some problems but Ashcroft's book doesn't contain problems. Is it good or bad ? The exam is an oral examination.

Er... Look again! Ashcroft and Mermin DEFINITELY have problems at the end of the chapters. I know, I've had to do them!

So you have to take a solid state physics course at the graduate level, no less, for your NE major? Is this required? Have you taken an undergraduate level solid state physics course before, using, say, Kittel? If not, this is going to be a very abrupt introduction to solid state physics.

Zz.

 

[dRic2]

So you have to take a solid state physics course at the graduate level, no less, for your NE major?

Yes. It is a graduate level course, according to our professor. But he's not a physicist, he's a nuclear engineering and the course has been thought for engineering students, so I have the feeling it is a bit easier than a solid state physics course for physics graduated students. I believe the level is in between Kittel and Ashcroft/Ziman, but closer to the latter. He said Kittel is not enough, but Ashcroft and Ziman contain more than the requested material.

Is this required?

Depends on the field a student wants to specialize into. I choose nuclear physics & technology, so it is recommended.

Have you taken an undergraduate level solid state physics course before, using, say, Kittel?

No

this is going to be a very abrupt introduction to solid state physics.

I know ... Not the first time something like this happened though...

 

[dRic2]

If you had to chose one, what would it be? (no coin flip allowed )

 

[vanhees71]

If I've the choice between these two book only, then Ashcroft/Mermin, but I'm not a solid-state physicist myself.

Classics concerning non-relativistic many-body theory are

Fetter&Walecka
Kadanoff&Baym

A more modern book is Altland, Condensed-matter field theory.

 

[dRic2]

Thanks. I'd prefer to stick to the recommended books. Saw Atland's book in the library the other day... That is definitively too much for me.

 

[vanhees71]

Then I think Ashcroft/Mermin goes more into the depth, and it's the all-time classic of the subject.

As far as I can judge Ziman (of which I've a German translation) is also very good and maybe a more gentle starting point (but it has been quite a long time I've last read in these books).