Electricity and Magnetism by Edward Purcell

[bcrowell]

• Author: Edward Purcell
• Title: Electricity and Magnetism
• Amazon Link: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1107013607/?tag=pfamazon01-20
• Prerequisities: Freshman mechanics. A year of calculus. Purcell introduces vector calculus from scratch, but most students who hadn't already had vector calc would probably be overwhelmed.

Table of Contents:
1. Electrostatics: charges and fields
2. The electric potential
3. Electric field around conductors
4. Electric currents
5. The fields of moving charges
6. The magnetic field
7. Electromagnetic induction
8. Alternating-current circuits
9. Maxwell's equations and electromagnetic waves
10. Electric fields in matter
11. Magnetic fields in matter
Appendixes
Index.

 

[bcrowell]

This is a best-of-breed book. Its highlight is the extensive use of relativity to develop the idea of electromagnetism as the first unified field theory. Although the book does present the mathematical tools of vector calculus from scratch, it is clearly designed for students who are physics majors, have had a substantial high school physics course, and have had strong mathematical preparation. I would not dare to use this book to teach an E&M course to a less elite audience.

The use of cgs units in this book is IMO a nuisance. Given the book's emphasis on relativity as a link between electricity and magnetism, it's nice to use a system in which E and B have the same units. However, I prefer to handle this by using SI units and writing Maxwell's equations with the coupling constants expressed as k and k/c^2, which makes the relativistic links almost as evident and allows a much easier connection with practical laboratory measurements. There is a 3rd edition coming out in 2013 from Cambridge Press, as Purcell and Morin, and it will have SI units -- yay! I would not recommend buying the 2nd edition at this point.

The book is extremely old, and although Maxwell's equations haven't changed, some of the discussion of experimental evidence, e.g., bounds on the non-neutrality of the hydrogen atom, are many decades out of date.

 

[WannabeNewton]

Would you recommend Purcell over Griffiths for someone who is looking for a deep conceptual understanding? What I mean is, when the level of mathematics is no issue, would you say the problems in Purcell tend to instill a deeper understanding or the problems in Griffiths or are they about equal? I'm not sure how much relativity Griffiths uses but approaching EM from a SR point of view would be more appealing.

 

[bcrowell]

Would you recommend Purcell over Griffiths for someone who is looking for a deep conceptual understanding? What I mean is, when the level of mathematics is no issue, would you say the problems in Purcell tend to instill a deeper understanding or the problems in Griffiths or are they about equal? I'm not sure how much relativity Griffiths uses but approaching EM from a SR point of view would be more appealing.

I haven't read Griffiths, but Griffiths is an upper-division book, Purcell lower-division.

 

[WannabeNewton]

I haven't read Griffiths, but Griffiths is an upper-division book, Purcell lower-division.

Indeed but they don't seem to have much of a difference in terms of content / introductory material and mathematics; neither of them go beyond vector calculus. I was just wondering which had harder problems so I could recommend one over the other as I've only seen the problems in Purcell and not in Griffiths.

 

[jasonRF]

(I am only familiar with 2nd edition, as it was the required book for second semester physics)

This is a fantastic book on classical electromagnetism, designed for freshmen/sophmores (at least in US). The exposition yields significant insight into the physics and is truly enjoyable. Some of the problems are straightforward, while others require significant amounts of work and insight. In principle the book "teaches" the vector calculus that is required, but in reality prior knowledge of vector calculus is highly recommended. The book mostly covers electrostatics, magnetostatics, induction, and fields in matter. Electromagnetic waves are certainly included but not emphasized. A great follow-on book that covers waves brilliantly is "electromagnetic vibrations, waves, and radiation" by Bekefi and Barrett.

While I really enjoy this book, I am not convinced it is appropriate for most students as a first exposure to the subject. My second semester physics course was based on Purcell and I found it to be too challenging. I had never seen any electromagnetic theory or vector calculus before. Yes, there were a few students in class that seemed to easily grasp everything, but most of us really struggled just to survive. I did learn a lot from the course and the book, but I would have learned even more had the book (or the professor!) been a tad more helpful. Still, the book did capture my imagination and to this day I have a love of electromagnetic theory that was instilled by this book.

 

[WannabeNewton]

The 3rd edition actually came out (either yesterday or today). It was redone by Morin so you can trust it will be good (based on the draft he didn't change the text itself but rather added a slew of more difficult problems about half of which have solutions in the text).

 

[n10Newton]

The Book is very Low I read it with the whole Berkeley Physics Course (in Academic Year 10) when I have to Appear for AP Physics B.

 

[micromass]

The Book is very Low I read it with the whole Berkeley Physics Course (in Academic Year 10) when I have to Appear for AP Physics B.

It's about the hardest E&M text for freshmen out there...

 

[AnTiFreeze3]

The Book is very Low I read it with the whole Berkeley Physics Course (in Academic Year 10) when I have to Appear for AP Physics B.

You used a college-level textbook that uses vector calculus to prepare for an alegbra-based physics exam?

 

[n10Newton]

What to do, not any Algebra based Physics book was available in my country that time and also I have no PC or Internet to checkout, So I just started with University Physics 12th Ed. and After that this Berkeley.

This is the same type Question most IPhO preparing student ask, If IPhO don't require calculus in solving their problems then why do show Calculus based Solutions.

 

[tms]

I haven't read Griffiths, but Griffiths is an upper-division book, Purcell lower-division.

At the school I went to, we used Purcell in the upper-division E&M course.

 

[SredniVashtar]

The 3rd edition actually came out (either yesterday or today).

Does it still use the cgs system, or has it gone metric?

 

[Snow-Leopard]

Does it still use the cgs system, or has it gone metric?

New Editions comes in SI Units.I have 2nd Low Price Edition which is also in SI.

 

[SredniVashtar]

New Editions comes in SI Units.I have 2nd Low Price Edition which is also in SI.

Sorry, I meant SI, as you surmised.
I knew there was a catch in that bargain! I bought it used last year but it's in cgs (first edition, then). Valuable book nonetheless, as all the other volumes of the Berkeley Physics Course.

Perhaps there should be an entry for the whole set.

 

[SredniVashtar]

Sorry, I meant SI

Actually I should have said (rationalized) MKS. And to be more accurate, my concern was actually about the use of the Gauss system of unit.
I know for sure that the first edition of Purcell uses k = 1 in the definition of the Coulomb force (please forgive the lack of subscripts, I believe it's clear what I am trying to say here)

F = q1 q2 / r^2

(a sample of Maxwell's equations for the first AND second edition:
div E = 4 π ρ, rot B = 1/c dE/dt + 4 π J / c)

while most modern em books use

F = 1/4 π ε q1 q2 / r^2,
div E = ρ/ε, rot B = 1/c^2 dE/dt + μ J

So, I was wondering, since I could buy the hardbound 3rd edition at a good price, in which unit system is it cast? Or, to make matter simpler, how are those maxwell's equations written?

 

[SredniVashtar]

Ok, I could not resist and I ordered it on Amazon (starting from the page in this forum, I hope the 6% transfer has worked all right). It arrived today and yes, the third edition does away with the gaussian units and is actually using a full feathered SI.
That is, these are the equations it uses

F = 1/4 π ε q1 q2 / r^2,

div E = ρ/ε,

rot B = 1/c^2 dE/dt + μ J​

(Not true for the second edition though).

 

[mheslep]

It's about the hardest E&M text for freshmen out there...

How do you reach that conclusion?

 

[Jorriss]

How do you reach that conclusion?

Are you actually asking? It's common knowledge it's one of the most, if not the most, advanced introductory textbooks on E&M.

 

[WannabeNewton]

How do you reach that conclusion?

It brings out magnetism using special relativity and talks about the vector potential formulation of maxwell's equations...do you see other standard freshman level EM texts doing this?

 

[mishima]

Does anyone else have the new edition? I was aware they were changing units, but are there any other substantial changes? I've only seen the excerpt chapter pdf.

 

[Vargo]

This was my freshman EM book. I loved it. For me, the Gaussian-CGS units (k=1!) were a highlight, so I am sorry to hear that they are changing that part. Actually, if I am honest, then I will admit that MeV were confusing at first. But it made the learning all the richer once I figured it out. To be overly dramatic, this book freed me from SI rigid thinking. More realistically, I just enjoyed the course and found the physics interesting.

 

[WannabeNewton]

Does anyone else have the new edition? I was aware they were changing units, but are there any other substantial changes? I've only seen the excerpt chapter pdf.

There are a ton of new problems, many of them having detailed solutions, and there are some new appendices and worked examples but other than that it seems the same.

 

[mheslep]

It brings out magnetism using special relativity and talks about the vector potential formulation of maxwell's equations...do you see other standard freshman level EM texts doing this?

I've not reviewed the suite of EM texts. In general, outside faculty and TA's, I have not found those who have (reviewed all competing textbooks). Then of course there is second hand knowledge.

 

[bcrowell]

I ordered a copy of the 3rd edition ($76), and compared it side by side with my disintegrating copy of the 1965 1st edition. The price is amazingly reasonable compared to the kind of exploitative prices you see these days for textbooks.

One thing I'd never noticed before is that the 1st edition has a notice on its copyright page saying that it's available for royalty-free use after 1970. (It was an NSF-sponsored project.) So theoretically it's legal to scan it and put it on the web for free. However, what I find when I look around on the web is people illegally making the 2nd edition available through sleazy file-sharing sites.

The 3rd edition is almost twice the bulk of the 1st. This is mostly because there are far more problems, and many of them have complete solutions in the back of the book. This is a great new feature.

There is also an applications section at the end of every chapter.

For the most part, though, it's exactly the same text with only a very few minor changes here and there. The line art is mostly the same. The graphic design isn't as nice as in the 1st edition, which often used gray backgrounds on the figures, with a full bleed. In the 3rd edition, the figures often aren't sufficiently clearly divided from the text, and the effect is extremely ugly.

The big change is the switch to SI units. Three cheers.

 

[atyy]

From the preface of the 3rd edition of Jackson: For many years Ed Purcell and I had a pact to support each other in the use of Gaussian units. Now I have betrayed him!

 

[jasonRF]

...

The 3rd edition is almost twice the bulk of the 1st. This is mostly because there are far more problems, and many of them have complete solutions in the back of the book. This is a great new feature.

There is also an applications section at the end of every chapter.

For the most part, though, it's exactly the same text with only a very few minor changes here and there. The line art is mostly the same. The graphic design isn't as nice as in the 1st edition, which often used gray backgrounds on the figures, with a full bleed. In the 3rd edition, the figures often aren't sufficiently clearly divided from the text, and the effect is extremely ugly.

The big change is the switch to SI units. Three cheers.

That sounds great - the next generation of students to use this book will certainly benefit from the extra problems with solutions. Much more convenient than what I tried to do: dig through the physics library attempting to find solved problems in books that were at the appropriate level! As an EE I of course use SI exclusively, but I found that learning EM in cgs first did not present any kind of problem later on in my education / carreer, so I am mostly agnostic to that change.

 

[fras]

Since special relativity has been touched upon. I would suggest reading Helliwell's Special Relativity text which is intended for students that have completed their first course in mechanics.

@WannabeNewton: Could you elaborate? I was beginning to buy Purcell after having my first introduction of SR through Helliwell.

Please consider CLASSICAL MECHANICS by John Taylor. Check out the reviews on Amazon.com- they are phenomenal. I ordered the book recently and have gone thru the 1st 3 chapters so far. All the reviews on this textbook are true! It is EXCELLENT!
(While in college many yrs ago we were brought up with MECHANICS by Keith Symon. The problems are next to impossible to solve which can be VERY discouraging.)

I thought this was a more advanced text than an introductory level text?

 

[WannabeNewton]

Pardon but elaborate on what exactly fras?

 

[fras]

I know you mean it to be rigorous when you say hardcore, but I would like to know in what way that is different from texts like Halliday or Freedman's Physics when approaching Electricity and Magnetism. Right now I know vector calculus and would consider myself pretty proficient in that area, and I understand SR to the degree that I can at my current level, but if Purcell requires me to know math higher than Calculus 3, then I probably won't buy the book.