Experimental physics for theoreticians

[Demystifier]

I am a theoretical physicist who would like to learn more about experimental physics. I will not work in a laboratory, so I do not need practical technical details. What I need are the general ideas and principles of various experimental techniques. Also, I don't want a book dealing with only one branch of physics (say only optics, or only nuclear physics). I want a book (or perhaps a book series) dealing with more-or-less all branches of experimental physics. Can someone recommend such a book or books?

 

[Bystander]

https://www.crcpress.com/Methods-of-Experimental-Physics/Pergament/p/book/9780750306089

 

[Demystifier]

https://www.crcpress.com/Methods-of-Experimental-Physics/Pergament/p/book/9780750306089

Thanks, but the only branch of physics it deals with is optics. I would like something more general. (It also deals with data processing in general, but data processing is an information science rather than physics.)

 

[Bystander]

Techniques of organic chemistry, volume 1: Physical methods of ...
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pol.1962.../abstract
John Wiley & Sons
by NG Gaylord - ‎1962
Mar 10, 2003 - Techniques of organic chemistry, volume 1: Physical methods of organic chemistry, Part III, 3rd ed. Edited by Arnold Weissberger. Interscience ...
Physical Methods of Chemistry
https://books.google.com/books?isbn=047154406X
Bryant W. Rossiter, ‎John F. Hamilton, ‎Roger C. Baetzold - 1993 - ‎Chemistry
This is a continuation of a series of books started by Dr. Arnold Weissberger in 1945 entitled Physical Methods of Organic Chemistry. These books were part of a ...
Don't know whether this is more in the ballpark ... it is and it isn't what it sounds/reads like ... yes, it is written from an organic chemist's perspective ... , and, no, it requires NO knowledge of chemistry.

 

[ShayanJ]

Thanks, but the only branch of physics it deals with is optics. I would like something more general. (It also deals with data processing in general, but data processing is an information science rather than physics.)

Maybe this is what you want. But its a long series!

 

[Demystifier]

Maybe this is what you want. But its a long series!

Impressive, but too much even for a single experimentalist (let alone theorist). When I said "book series", I meant not bigger than the Landau-Lifshitz series for theoretical physics.

 

[ShayanJ]

Impressive, but too much even for a single experimentalist (let alone theorist). When I said "book series", I meant not bigger than the Landau-Lifshitz series for theoretical physics.

Actually those are not very detailed books, at least the one I used in my undergrad wasn't!
LL explain SR,EM and GR in one book but I can show you a book only about detecting gravitational waves!
Also, there are several sides to experimental physics. Do you want to know how the instruments work? or How the data are analyzed? or How the experiments are designed?
The instruments usually span several fields so there you have a chance to be able to find a good book that spans several fields. Data analysis is also almost the same but I somehow got the impression that analyzing data from gravitational waves are somehow different. But designing experiment seems the most field dependent of the above three and it seems to me that there is a little chance you can find a general book about this. But if you know the implications of a theory well enough and also are familiar with the tools you have, you should be good at designing experiments.

I think your best chance is a patch work of different books to only get general ideas and not going into field dependent issues. For now I have two suggestions:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/3527410589/?tag=pfamazon01-20
(Yeah, it says in high energy physics on the cover but I don't see what prevents you from applying these tools to other areas of physics)

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1420091859/?tag=pfamazon01-20

This may be interesting too:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0198570740/?tag=pfamazon01-20

 

[Demystifier]

Do you want to know how the instruments work?

Yes, I want to understand their physical basis.

 

[ShayanJ]

Yes, I want to understand their physical basis.

Then this is what you want:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1420091859/?tag=pfamazon01-20

And this:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0470131489/?tag=pfamazon01-20

Your choice!

But I strongly recommend you to read about data analysis too. I know only a little but I really feel even that little contributed to my understanding of physics. This seems to be a good source:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/3527410589/?tag=pfamazon01-20

 

[Demystifier]

Then this is what you want:

My bad, I was not really so much interested about instruments as such. I guess I should have say that I want to know how experiments are designed (but not in too many technical details).

 

[Andy Resnick]

My bad, I was not really so much interested about instruments as such. I guess I should have say that I want to know how experiments are designed (but not in too many technical details).

I think your original request is a bit unfair- it would be like me (an experimentalist) asking for a single book covering all of theoretical methods used to investigate physics- not just a single branch, but the entire field. And I don't need to know any technical or practical details. And it shouldn't be too long. And I'm not interested in formulas, I just want to know how people develop the ideas.

 

[ShayanJ]

My bad, I was not really so much interested about instruments as such. I guess I should have say that I want to know how experiments are designed (but not in too many technical details).

Ironically the only field-independent parts of that is how instruments work and how the resulting data are analyzed! The other parts are coming up with an idea about how to use the instruments you have at hand to create the theoretical situation of interest in the lab and then analyzing the resulting data. As you can see its hardly interconnected with the field you're doing experiments in (aside from being an innovative process that can't have a "quick-guide" as you seem to expect!) and as a result, you'll get that very long series that I mentioned!
So, as I said before, the best you can do is studying about experimental methods in a particular field and that will give you some intuition that helps you have an idea of what people do in other fields.

 

[Demystifier]

I think your original request is a bit unfair- it would be like me (an experimentalist) asking for a single book covering all of theoretical methods used to investigate physics- not just a single branch, but the entire field. And I don't need to know any technical or practical details. And it shouldn't be too long. And I'm not interested in formulas, I just want to know how people develop the ideas.

Fair enough, let me make a more fair request. A book (or book series) with no more than 1500 pages covering all branches of experimental physics. Details can be there. (I think it's fair because I know a plenty of such books for theoretical physics)

 

[Demystifier]

Ironically the only field-independent parts of that is how instruments work and how the resulting data are analyzed! The other parts are coming up with an idea about how to use the instruments you have at hand to create the theoretical situation of interest in the lab and then analyzing the resulting data. As you can see its hardly interconnected with the field you're doing experiments in (aside from being an innovative process that can't have a "quick-guide" as you seem to expect!) and as a result, you'll get that very long series that I mentioned!
So, as I said before, the best you can do is studying about experimental methods in a particular field and that will give you some intuition that helps you have an idea of what people do in other fields.

Fine, but if some theoreticians can write single books covering all branches of theoretical physics, I am convinced that some experimentalists could do the same for experimental physics. Ideally, I would like something like an experimental analogue of this book:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0679776311/?tag=pfamazon01-20

 

[ShayanJ]

Fine, but if some theoreticians can write single books covering all branches of theoretical physics, I am convinced that some experimentalists could do the same for experimental physics. Ideally, I would like something like an experimental analogue of this book:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0679776311/?tag=pfamazon01-20

This is a fallacy. You're comparing apples with oranges. To clarify my point, I should be too pedantic here. Penrose doesn't explain all of theoretical physics, he explains general principles, axioms and fundamental assumptions and equations from which all situations of interest to theoretical physics can be derived. For example he doesn't explain how to find the equivalent capacitance of several capacitors in a circuit but that can be derived from Maxwell's equations and other fundamental assumptions in electromagnetism.
You're assuming that there is such an organized structure of assumptions, principles, axioms and equations that experimental physicists use to design experiments. You're assuming that designing experiments is like some specific calculations that we can expect Mathematica to be able to do for us. That's wrong, designing experiments is like developing a theory. The theoretical equivalent of what you want is not a book that explains all theories, but rather a book that explains how to develop a theory. There can be no such book because developing a theory is an innovative process. Its the same with designing an experiment.

 

[Demystifier]

Penrose doesn't explain all of theoretical physics, he explains general principles, axioms and fundamental assumptions and equations from which all of situations of interest to theoretical physics can be derived. For example he doesn't explain how to find the equivalent capacitance of several capacitors in a circuit but that can be derived from Maxwell's equations and other fundamental assumptions in electromagnetism.

OK then, how about the following books?

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0486652270/?tag=pfamazon01-20

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1439884463/?tag=pfamazon01-20

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0387257993/?tag=pfamazon01-20

https://www.amazon.com/dp/3540368043/?tag=pfamazon01-20

Is something similar for experimental physics still impossible?

 

[ShayanJ]

Is something similar for experimental physics still impossible?

Is there a series of books that explain how to develop a theory without following the development of some theories and without specializing to a particular field?

 

[Demystifier]

Is there a series of books that explain how to develop a theory without following the development of some theories and without specializing to a particular field?

No, but that's not what I want for experimental physics. Come on, I just want a book on experimental physics which covers most branches of physics. Is that really too much?

 

[ShayanJ]

No, but that's not what I want for experimental physics. Come on, I just want a book on experimental physics which covers most branches of physics. Is that really too much?

But I mentioned such a book series in post #5 and you yourself admitted that it is too much!
You can always decide to use that book series but only read certain parts of certain volumes. But to know much, you need to read much!
Also, my point was that there is no underlying theory of experiment design. You should follow the design of several experiments to get the idea of how to design an experiment. And that can be done by reading a few of experimental methods in several fields. I can find you such books if you want. But, of course, the more the experience, the better the result. So again, to understand better, you need to read more or do it yourself.
Also, you can't understand designing experiments without knowing how the instruments work and how the data are analyzed, as you can't develop a relativistic theory without understanding relativity. But maybe that's the detail part and not needed at the level of understanding you want.

 

[Demystifier]

But I mentioned such a book series in post #5 and you yourself admitted that it is too much!
You can always decide to use that book series but only read certain parts of certain volumes. But to know much, you need to read much!
Also, my point was that there is no underlying theory of experiment design. You should follow the design of several experiments to get the idea of how to design an experiment. And that can be done by reading a few of experimental methods in several fields. I can find you such books if you want. But, of course, the more the experience, the better the result. So again, to understand better, you need to read more or do it yourself.
Also, you can't understand designing experiments without knowing how the instruments work and how the data are analyzed, as you can't develop a relativistic theory without understanding relativity. But maybe that's the detail part and not needed at the level of understanding you want.

Fine, if I also need to know how instruments work and how data are analyzed, then I am ready to read about that too. But I don't want to become an expert. I just want a broad overview. That's why the book series containing 30 books is too much for me. I am convinced that a broad overview of all most relevant stuff about experimental physics can be put in a compact form within 500-1500 pages.

 

[vanhees71]

What's wrong with any of the standard experimental-physics textbooks like Halliday&Resnick&Walker or Tipler?

 

[ShayanJ]

Fine, if I also need to know how instruments work and how data are analyzed, then I am ready to read about that too. But I don't want to become an expert. I just want a broad overview. That's why the book series containing 30 books is too much for me. I am convinced that a broad overview of all most relevant stuff about experimental physics can be put in a compact form within 500-1500 pages.

You learned theoretical physics by getting introduced to physical theories gradually. You both went from simpler theories to more complicated theories and also went from a simple understanding of those theories to more sophisticated understanding of those theories. Why do you expect experimental physics to be different?
Sorry if I'm talking too much but it seems I'm really bad at delivering my thoughts on this and it seems that I made a mess with my explanations, so I go back and explain again.
Designing experiments is not something besides the theory itself, the instruments and the data analysis, but its all of them combined with the addition of the innovative thinking of the experimentalist. Its because an experiment is just using instruments to create a situation that is the input to a theory, and then read out the results of that situation using instruments and then using data analysis to extract meaningful statements from those results to compare with the output of the theory. So experimental physics is just that, theory+instruments+data analysis+innovative thinking. There are some field-specific things too but I guess those go into the innovative thinking part and is actually the intuition of the experienced experimentalist in that particular field. Also, the better an experimental physicist knows the instruments and the data analysis methods, the better s\he will become at using them, just like any other tools.
Its understandable that you don't want to read about a specific field and its also understandable that you think there can be a book of reasonable size on experimental physics. But it all just means that you want to read about the above aspects of experimental physics in general and not about experimental physics in several fields. So for you, learning about instruments and data analysis is not besides learning experimental physics, its learning experimental physics itself!
I hope I made it clear enough this time, otherwise I just apologize for making so many posts without conveying any helpful message.

 

[Demystifier]

You learned theoretical physics by getting introduced to physical theories gradually. You both went from simpler theories to more complicated theories and also went from a simple understanding of those theories to more sophisticated understanding of those theories. Why do you expect experimental physics to be different?
Sorry if I'm talking too much but it seems I'm really bad at delivering my thoughts on this and it seems that I made a mess with my explanations, so I go back and explain again.
Designing experiments is not something besides the theory itself, the instruments and the data analysis, but its all of them combined with the addition of the innovative thinking of the experimentalist. Its because an experiment is just using instruments to create a situation that is the input to a theory, and then read out the results of that situation using instruments and then using data analysis to extract meaningful statements from those results to compare with the output of the theory. So experimental physics is just that, theory+instruments+data analysis+innovative thinking. There are some field-specific things too but I guess those go into the innovative thinking part and is actually the intuition of the experienced experimentalist in that particular field.
Its understandable that you don't want to read about a specific field and its also understandable that you think there can be a book of reasonable size on experimental physics. But it all just means that you want to read about the above aspects of experimental physics in general and not about experimental physics in several fields. So for you, learning about instruments and data analysis is not besides learning experimental physics, its learning experimental physics itself!
I hope I made it clear enough this time, otherwise I just apologize for making so may posts without conveying any helpful message.

Fine, but I still don't know is there or is there not a single book (or a small series) where a broad overview of all this can be found. The book can be divided into chapters for separate branches of physics (optics, nuclear, etc), just as the mentioned books on theoretical physics are. But it doesn't mean that one cannot put all this into a single book.

 

[Demystifier]

What's wrong with any of the standard experimental-physics textbooks like Halliday&Resnick&Walker or Tipler?

What books do you have in mind? Those that I know by the mentioned authors are about general physics, spending more space to explain the theoretical concepts (at a basic level suitable to experimentalists) then to explain the experiments themselves.

 

[ShayanJ]

Fine, but I still don't know is there or is there not a single book (or a small series) where a broad overview of all this can be found. The book can be divided into chapters for separate branches of physics (optics, nuclear, etc), just as the mentioned books on theoretical physics are. But it doesn't mean that one cannot put all this into a single book.

Well, it seems that no one has done that. And I think its because in contrast to theoretical physics where you can find a lot of people who are excited about extra dimensions and black holes and want to learn it all in one go, there is no one who is excited about calculating p-values and calibrating instruments.(except for experimental physicists of course!)
So it seems you can either read a single book about experimental methods in a single field or read several books about general aspects of experimental physics.

 

[Demystifier]

Well, it seems that no one has done that. And I think its because in contrast to theoretical physics where you can find a lot of people who are excited about extra dimensions and black holes and want to learn it all in one go, there is no one who is excited about calculating p-values and calibrating instruments.(except for experimental physicists of course!)
So it seems you can either read a single book about experimental methods in a single field or read several books about general aspects of experimental physics.

That looks very disappointing.

 

[vanhees71]

What books do you have in mind? Those that I know by the mentioned authors are about general physics, spending more space to explain the theoretical concepts (at a basic level suitable to experimentalists) then to explain the experiments themselves.

Well, as theoretician it shouldn't surprise you that for doing any physics you need theory. Already to use a meter stick to measure distances needs theory, although we are so used to it that we don't even realize it any more. Already the idea to use Euclidean geometry to measure the lengths of everyday stuff around us is theory. That's why you first have to explain the theoretical concepts before you can even talk about experiments. It's of course also the other way around, i.e., theory needs also experimental input. The interrelation between theory and experiment is mutual and not trivial.

 

[ShayanJ]

That looks very disappointing.

If you are ready to read a small series of books, then I don't see how that is disappointing. You read about some instruments(mostly relevant to the certain field you're going to choose for the third book), then read about some data analysis, then read about experimental methods in a certain field. Then try to read detailed explanations of only a few experiments in other fields. That seems to give a really good understanding of experimental physics for a theoretical physicist.

 

[Demystifier]

If you are ready to read a small series of books, then I don't see how that is disappointing. You read about some instruments(mostly relevant to the certain field you're going to choose for the third book), then read about some data analysis, then read about experimental methods in a certain field. Then try to read detailed explanations of only a few experiments in other fields. That seems to give a really good understanding of experimental physics for a theoretical physicist.

Perhaps I could motivate myself to read all this, but for motivation I first need a big picture. I cannot efficiently think about details before seeing the big picture. That's why I first need a single book (or a small inter-connected series).

 

[Demystifier]

Well, as theoretician it shouldn't surprise you that for doing any physics you need theory. Already to use a meter stick to measure distances needs theory, although we are so used to it that we don't even realize it any more. Already the idea to use Euclidean geometry to measure the lengths of everyday stuff around us is theory. That's why you first have to explain the theoretical concepts before you can even talk about experiments. It's of course also the other way around, i.e., theory needs also experimental input. The interrelation between theory and experiment is mutual and not trivial.

Good point! But now that I learned some theory (more than an experimentalist needs to know), I would like to get some broad overview of experimental physics. Am I asking for too much? Or for too little?

 

[micromass]

For pure math there's the princeton companion: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0691118809/?tag=pfamazon01-20
For applied math ther's also a princeton companion: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0691150397/?tag=pfamazon01-20
Maybe Demystifier is looking for something like that but in experimental physics?

 

[Demystifier]

For pure math there's the princeton companion: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0691118809/?tag=pfamazon01-20
For applied math ther's also a princeton companion: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0691150397/?tag=pfamazon01-20
Maybe Demystifier is looking for something like that but in experimental physics?

Yes, exactly. And I love the first of those math books very much, precisely for giving me a broad overview of pure math, at a level suitable for someone who, like me, is not a pure mathematician.

BTW, as books giving an overview of all pure math, I like also
Mac Lane
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0387962174/?tag=pfamazon01-20
and the Russian 3-books series Aleksandrov et al
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0486409163/?tag=pfamazon01-20

 

[Andy Resnick]

Fine, if I also need to know how instruments work and how data are analyzed, then I am ready to read about that too. But I don't want to become an expert. I just want a broad overview. That's why the book series containing 30 books is too much for me. I am convinced that a broad overview of all most relevant stuff about experimental physics can be put in a compact form within 500-1500 pages.

Perhaps the problem is that while a few expressions can encapsulate an entire branch of science (e.g. Maxwell's equations), the same is not true for experimental measurements. That is to say, for example, 'spectroscopy', a measurement technique that can be applied to a wide range of physical phenomena, requires vastly different realizations to measure say, visible light transmission, elastic responses, molecular structure, etc. And each 'flavor' of spectroscope has its own specialized jargon: 'chemical shift' means a lot in NMR, nothing at all in acoustic spectrosopy. It makes no sense to try and write an overview text about spectroscopic techniques.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectroscopy

Even for something simple, say measurement of pressure, there are hundreds of devices, all optimized to work in a more-or-less narrow range of physical conditions with different substances. Same for temperature and viscosity.

Then there's the issue of noise, the various sources and and how they affect measurements.

For what it's worth, the following are good overviews:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0521878586/?tag=pfamazon01-20
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0521809266/?tag=pfamazon01-20
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0470402296/?tag=pfamazon01-20
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0521731674/?tag=pfamazon01-20
http://www.omega.com/techref/