Is Park's Introduction to Quantum Theory Too Complicated?

AI Thread Summary
Griffith's Quantum Mechanics is appreciated for its writing style, but concerns arise regarding the clarity of Griffith's Particle book, particularly in the wave function chapter. The discussion highlights confusion over the integration of the wave function solution, ψk(x,t)=A(k)ei(kx-ωkt), and whether k should only take integer values. The integration approach seems unconventional, leading to questions about the necessity of this method and whether it complicates understanding. The author notes a lack of detailed mathematical steps, which raises concerns about potential gaps in the material. While the appendix references Fourier's theorem, it does not sufficiently clarify the role of A(k), contributing to the perceived complexity. The contrast between the clarity of Chapter 3 and the difficulties in Chapter 2 prompts a request for opinions on the book's presentation and the potential for personal mathematical shortcomings affecting comprehension.
Elwin.Martin
Messages
202
Reaction score
0
I own a copy of Griffith's Quantum Mechanics and I like how it is written very much but while skimming through Griffith's Particle book I saw a reference that said "at the level of Park" and I decided to investigate.

I started to read through it and the text is structured the way most books are, half on theory and half on more direct applications. An introductory chapter on failures of classical physics and then an introduction to the wave function etc but I don't why Park's wave function chapter contains some of the material it contains.

In his second chapter, section 2.3, he takes what he calls a simple solution of the Schrodinger equation

ψk(x,t)=A(k)ei(kx-ωkt)

and then he takes and integrates with respect to k?

ψ(x,t)=∫A(k)ei(kx-ωkt)dk
So does k take any non integer values? I would think that integrating over just integers would still make more sense as a sum, right?

He uses this A(k)ei(kx-ωkt) format through the chapter and tends to skip a lot of steps mathematically and I'm concerned about missing something simple.

Is this a merit of the book that I'm missing somehow by being weak or is the book just filled with gaps the reader needs to fill in? His whole development of the wave function just strikes me as odd...

Though he includes a brief explanation in the Appendix he just applies Fourier's theorem and states a piece of information about A(k). Is this meant to be easily followed? It seems a bit odd to go through all this trouble for his A(k)...

He then defines a φ(k) and a J in terms of A(k) and it just gets messier and messier...

When I skipped to Chapter 3 I had no problem reading the material but I really dislike the presentation of Chapter 2.

Anyway I was just wondering if I could get more opinions on the book and maybe an explanation for my problem. It's probably just my weak math skills but I still feel like he skips a bit and makes things unnecessarily complicated...

Thoughts?

Elwin
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why do you think k has to be an integer?
 
For the following four books, has anyone used them in a course or for self study? Compiler Construction Principles and Practice 1st Edition by Kenneth C Louden Programming Languages Principles and Practices 3rd Edition by Kenneth C Louden, and Kenneth A Lambert Programming Languages 2nd Edition by Allen B Tucker, Robert E Noonan Concepts of Programming Languages 9th Edition by Robert W Sebesta If yes to either, can you share your opinions about your personal experience using them. I...
Hi, I have notice that Ashcroft, Mermin and Wei worked at a revised edition of the original solid state physics book (here). The book, however, seems to be never available. I have also read that the reason is related to some disputes related to copyright. Do you have any further information about it? Did you have the opportunity to get your hands on this revised edition? I am really curious about it, also considering that I am planning to buy the book in the near future... Thanks!

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
5K
Replies
16
Views
3K
Back
Top