Funny thing I've found in David Griffiths QM textbook

In summary, the conversation discusses an error in a physics textbook regarding the sum of deviations from the average of a random variable. The reasoning given is incorrect, but the result is still true. The conversation also references a joke made by Carlin about IQ being normally distributed.
  • #1
Alexandre
29
0
I really like the book, its the first physics textbook that I liked actually. But I've found a minor error.
On page 8 (chapter 1 The Wave Function) it says that if you sum deviations from average of a random variable you'd get zero because " Δj is as often negative as positive", here's the formula:
[tex] \Delta j=j-<j> [/tex]

But I think that's not the reason you will get zero, it need not deviate the same number of times in both direction from the average, but in that case number of deviations on one side will be canceled by the magnitude of deviations on the opposite side, I think Griffith mixed median with an average.

wOXRB.jpg
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You are right.
 
  • Like
Likes Alexandre
  • #3
The reasoning Griffiths gives is indeed incorrect, but the result is still true: summing deviations from the average gives you zero.
 
  • Like
Likes Alexandre
  • #4
In a sense, Carlin is right, though I doubt he was aware of this when he made his comment: IQ ( a measure of intelligence/stupidity) is normally-distributed, so that the mean/average and median coincide.
 
  • Like
Likes Alexandre
  • #5
WWGD said:
In a sense, Carlin is right, though I doubt he was aware of this when he made his comment: IQ ( a measure of intelligence/stupidity) is normally-distributed, so that the mean/average and median coincide.
On the idealized curve yes, on the actual data no. Besides it's a joke.
 
  • #6
Alexandre said:
On the idealized curve yes, on the actual data no. Besides it's a joke.
Ah, sorry, I did not get it the 1st time. I guess a Carlin quote should have made it clear.
 
  • #7
WWGD said:
Ah, sorry, I did not get it the 1st time. I guess a Carlin quote should have made it clear.
http://cdn.alltheragefaces.com/img/faces/large/happy-yes-l.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:

FAQ: Funny thing I've found in David Griffiths QM textbook

1. What is the "funny thing" in David Griffiths QM textbook?

The "funny thing" refers to a recurring theme in the textbook where the author inserts humorous comments and anecdotes to make the complex concepts of quantum mechanics more approachable and engaging for readers.

2. Is the "funny thing" relevant to the subject matter of quantum mechanics?

While the "funny thing" may not directly contribute to the technical aspects of quantum mechanics, it serves as a way to keep readers interested and motivated to continue learning about the subject.

3. How does the "funny thing" impact the overall tone of the textbook?

The "funny thing" adds a lighthearted and informal tone to the textbook, making it more enjoyable to read and reducing the intimidation factor often associated with quantum mechanics.

4. Does the "funny thing" detract from the credibility of the textbook?

No, the "funny thing" does not detract from the credibility of the textbook. It is clear that the author is well-versed in the subject matter and the humorous comments do not undermine the scientific content.

5. Can the "funny thing" be considered a distraction from learning quantum mechanics?

It is a matter of personal preference. While some readers may find the "funny thing" distracting, others may find it helpful in keeping them engaged and motivated to learn. Ultimately, the "funny thing" does not hinder the learning experience and can be skipped over if desired.

Similar threads

Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
20K
Replies
6
Views
6K
Replies
5
Views
27K
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Back
Top