Experimental physics for theoreticians

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the desire of a theoretical physicist to learn about experimental physics without delving into practical technical details. The focus is on finding general resources that cover a broad range of experimental techniques across various branches of physics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks recommendations for books that provide general ideas and principles of experimental physics across multiple branches, rather than focusing on a single area like optics.
  • Several links to specific books are shared, but some participants express dissatisfaction with these suggestions, noting they are too specialized or not sufficiently comprehensive.
  • There is a discussion about the different aspects of experimental physics, including how instruments work, data analysis, and experiment design, with some participants emphasizing the complexity and field-dependence of these topics.
  • One participant suggests that a patchwork of different books may be necessary to gain a general understanding without getting into field-specific issues.
  • Another participant argues that the request for a single comprehensive book covering all experimental methods is unrealistic, drawing a parallel to the challenges of finding a single book for all theoretical methods.
  • There is a suggestion that understanding experimental methods in specific fields could provide intuition applicable to other areas of physics.
  • Some participants express a desire for a book or series that is not excessively lengthy, with one suggesting a limit of 1500 pages.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the feasibility of finding a single comprehensive resource for experimental physics. There are competing views on the nature of the request and the availability of suitable materials.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the limitations in finding a single resource that adequately covers all branches of experimental physics, as well as the varying perspectives on what constitutes a suitable level of detail and comprehensiveness.

  • #31
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Demystifier
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
micromass said:
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
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #33
Demystifier said:
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/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DeBangis21 and yucheng

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K