Is understanding analytical mechanics essential for studying QM?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the necessity of understanding analytical mechanics, particularly through texts like Goldstein's, for studying quantum mechanics (QM). Participants explore the relationship between classical mechanics and quantum mechanics, considering the depth of knowledge required for effective learning in QM.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that a solid understanding of analytical mechanics is essential for grasping quantum mechanics, particularly concepts like Lagrangians and Hamiltonians.
  • Others suggest that not all of Goldstein's book is necessary, emphasizing that only key concepts are important for a basic understanding of QM.
  • One participant notes that while some educational programs teach QM without analytical mechanics, having that background can provide a significant advantage in understanding the underlying principles.
  • Another viewpoint expresses that for a typical undergraduate understanding of QM, analytical mechanics may not be strictly necessary, especially if one is not pursuing advanced topics.
  • There is a suggestion that engaging with the initial chapters of Goldstein could enhance comprehension of QM, particularly the Schrödinger formalism.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing opinions on the necessity of analytical mechanics for studying QM, with no consensus reached. Some believe it is essential, while others contend that it is not required for a basic understanding.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight varying educational approaches and the potential benefits of a classical mechanics background, but there is no agreement on a definitive requirement for studying analytical mechanics before QM.

Jianphys17
Messages
66
Reaction score
2
Hi at all.
I'm wondered is necessary learn well analytical mechanic ( eg learning The Goldstein's book), for understand and study QM ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, yes. Why would you think it's not?
 
Well, not the whole book, but definitely the important stuff, like Lagrangians and Hamiltonians.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jianphys17
dextercioby said:
Well, not the whole book, but definitely the important stuff, like Lagrangians and Hamiltonians.
It wouldn't harm him. :-)
 
Depends on how deep you want to go. If you want to know everything about QM an undergraduate in physics knows, then I think you'll be fine for the most part without ever taking analytical mechanics. Also, why do you want to study from Goldstein? That's a graduate textbook and is kind of overkill if what you ultimately want is to learn QM.
 
haushofer said:
Well, yes. Why would you think it's not?
Yes that i know, but i meant if it is necessary to study all Goldstein for good, for begin to grasp qm...
 
It always baffled me how some programs teach quantum mechanics without ever mentioning hamiltonians in the classical setting. It is kind of asking students to accept a completely new concept in a completely new setting without ever seeing the classical background.

That being said, some programs do teach QM without teaching analytical mechanics. However, you will have an advantage in terms of understanding the underlying concepts if you do.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby
TAHNKS
 
Goldstein is great book, just give it a try and read the lightly first chapters just to first 150p. and try to read hamiltonian formalism chapter. You'll enjoy quantum mechanics because you will understand Schrödinger formalism.
If you mean if it neccesary to read the whole book, No you don't need to.
But if you look further to learn advanced topics like relativity and quantum field theory you need it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
937
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
32
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K