CallMeDirac
- 46
- 11
sysprog said:I think that it shouldn't be perplexing to you to see Newton mentioned specifically in remarks about Newtonian physics, or even in remarks about something else ##-## after all, the man was truly remarkable.
The Dirac equation has many important implications.
Given your self-acknowledged absence of a deep understanding, it's not obvious how you might justify your being confident that you understand well enough to have an adequate foundation for the study of theoretical physics.
I don't mean to be too much of a naysayer, here ##-## although I agree with @robphy about the Feynman Lectures being rather advanced, and I wouldn't recommend them as a substitute for a good introductory textbook, even so, I think that they're very likey to reward and stimulate your fascination, along with imparting a greater appreciation of what is involved in the study of physics.
Allong with that, you might enjoy Thirty Years that Shook Physicsby Gerorge Gamov (who was a real physicist as well as a popular author) ##-## not for learning quantum mechanics, but for the marvelous story it tells.
Thanks for the reccomendation, I don't know why I was agitated in my remarks I am clearly not prepared for even the basics of theoretical physics and I think I didnt want to hear that.