Particle Introduction to Elementary Particles by David Griffiths

AI Thread Summary
David Griffiths' "Introduction to Elementary Particles" is noted for its content but criticized for the physical quality of the book. Users have pointed out that the binding and paper material can lead to pages ripping easily, particularly when referencing material at the beginning or end of the book. This issue is also mentioned in relation to Griffiths' "Quantum Mechanics" text, suggesting a recurring problem with the durability of his publications. Readers are advised to handle the book carefully to avoid damage while navigating through the material.

For those who have used this book

  • Lightly don't Recommend

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Strongly don't Recommend

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    11
Physics news on Phys.org
Go easy on the page turning, especially while flipping forth and back in the reference material at the very beginning or end of the book. Seems like Griffiths likes to use some or other bad combination of paper material and book binding. In both this text and his Quantum Mechanics text, seems like pages like to rip out a bit too easily
 
The book is fascinating. If your education includes a typical math degree curriculum, with Lebesgue integration, functional analysis, etc, it teaches QFT with only a passing acquaintance of ordinary QM you would get at HS. However, I would read Lenny Susskind's book on QM first. Purchased a copy straight away, but it will not arrive until the end of December; however, Scribd has a PDF I am now studying. The first part introduces distribution theory (and other related concepts), which...
I've gone through the Standard turbulence textbooks such as Pope's Turbulent Flows and Wilcox' Turbulent modelling for CFD which mostly Covers RANS and the closure models. I want to jump more into DNS but most of the work i've been able to come across is too "practical" and not much explanation of the theory behind it. I wonder if there is a book that takes a theoretical approach to Turbulence starting from the full Navier Stokes Equations and developing from there, instead of jumping from...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Poll Poll
Replies
16
Views
26K
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
4K
Back
Top