Good follow up to The theoretical Minimum?

AI Thread Summary
Self-teaching physics can be rewarding, and starting with "The Theoretical Minimum" by Leonard Susskind provides a solid foundation. For a follow-up, "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by David J. Griffiths is a strong choice, especially when paired with the third volume of the Feynman Lectures on Physics, which offers valuable insights into quantum physics. However, it's crucial to assess your mathematical background, particularly in calculus and linear algebra, as these subjects are essential for understanding advanced physics concepts. Comfort with classical mechanics and the Hamiltonian formalism is also important, as these topics will be revisited in more advanced texts. To ensure a comprehensive understanding, it's recommended to solidify your math skills and work through exercises in Susskind's book, as merely reading may not lead to true comprehension. Supplementary materials like Boas' "Mathematical Methods in the Physical Sciences" and Taylor's "Classical Mechanics" can further enhance your readiness for quantum mechanics.
Jonnathan
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I'm currently self teaching myself physics and I have never seen physics before this. The book that I'm using is The Theoretical Minimum - What You Need to Know to Start Doing Physics by Leonard Susskind. I plan to be finished with the book by mid next week and my question is what's a good follow up?

I'm extremely interested in quantum physicist and would like to learn it so I'm considering Introduction to Quantum Mechanics by David J. Griffiths and I would learn that accompanied by the third volume from the Feynman Lectures on Physics which I've read has a lot of good information on Quantum physics is that a viable follow up? Or will the material be to advanced for me?

If it's to advanced what would you recommend that I learn before I start on this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How's your math? Do you know calc I, II and III? Do you know linear algebra (not just matrices, but vector spaces and such)?

Are you comfortable with classical mechanics and the Hamiltonian formalism?
 
One of the later lectures in the book covers Hamiltonians I haven't gotten to that lecture yet but after a quick scan it seems to be pretty detailed I should be pretty comfortable with them by the time I finish that lecture if not I'll study them more in depth. I'm comfortable with calc, but I've never sen linear algebra although I do know vectors.
 
If you really want to be working through the more advanced texts, it's important that you are comfortable with the previous material at the level where you can solve a good amount of textbook problems. Susskind's book is fine, but I think it might only give an illusion of understanding unless you make sure to work out the exercises and seek out other sources as well. To really learn the material in there, first make sure that your calculus I-III, differential equations and linear algebra skills are damn solid. For this a commonly cited source is Boas' "Mathematical Methods in the Physical Sciences". Then if you already know Newtonian Mechanics, go through Taylor's "Classical Mechanics", focusing on Lagrangians and Hamiltonians, and Zettili's "Quantum Mechanics".
 
Last edited:
Hey, I am Andreas from Germany. I am currently 35 years old and I want to relearn math and physics. This is not one of these regular questions when it comes to this matter. So... I am very realistic about it. I know that there are severe contraints when it comes to selfstudy compared to a regular school and/or university (structure, peers, teachers, learning groups, tests, access to papers and so on) . I will never get a job in this field and I will never be taken serious by "real"...
Yesterday, 9/5/2025, when I was surfing, I found an article The Schwarzschild solution contains three problems, which can be easily solved - Journal of King Saud University - Science ABUNDANCE ESTIMATION IN AN ARID ENVIRONMENT https://jksus.org/the-schwarzschild-solution-contains-three-problems-which-can-be-easily-solved/ that has the derivation of a line element as a corrected version of the Schwarzschild solution to Einstein’s field equation. This article's date received is 2022-11-15...
Back
Top