Just a question regarding Q.M text by griffith.

  • Thread starter Thread starter haplo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Griffith Text
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the effectiveness of Griffiths' Quantum Mechanics (Q.M) textbook for preparing students for graduate-level courses. Participants express dissatisfaction with Griffiths, describing it as "watered down" and lacking critical discussions. They recommend supplementing it with Shankar's Q.M text and Robinett's Q.M for a more comprehensive understanding. The consensus is that relying solely on Griffiths may not adequately prepare students for advanced studies.

PREREQUISITES
  • Familiarity with Quantum Mechanics concepts
  • Understanding of integral evaluation techniques
  • Knowledge of derivation methods in physics
  • Experience with undergraduate-level physics textbooks
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Shankar's Quantum Mechanics for deeper insights
  • Explore Robinett's Quantum Mechanics for additional perspectives
  • Review advanced problem-solving techniques in Quantum Mechanics
  • Investigate supplementary resources for graduate-level Q.M preparation
USEFUL FOR

Graduate students in physics, educators seeking effective teaching materials, and anyone looking to enhance their understanding of Quantum Mechanics beyond Griffiths' textbook.

haplo
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
Wondering if your professor using this as main text, how good will it prepare you for Graduate Q.M course. Would you recommend to simultaneously study material from some other text. I wonder because we are finishing chapter 2 and problems do not seem that challenging, just bunch of integral evaluation and some derivations.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I used it for my undergrad Quantum course. It's a terrible book.
 
are you in grad school now?
 
haplo said:
are you in grad school now?
Yes.

I highly recommend picking up something like Shankar to supplement Griffiths. Griffiths' book is, at best, watered down, and at worst, completely lacking important discussions.
 
thats the impression i am having, while comparing it to Q.M by Robinett.

thanks for reply
 

Similar threads

Will using Griffith and Purcell benefit a beginner in E&M?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
Best Intro to Quantum Mechanics: Griffiths vs Dirac
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
7K
Linear Algebra What are some recommended second texts for self-studying linear algebra?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Classical Reading Goldstein's Classical Mechanics as an Undergraduate
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
7K
Classical Prerequisites for Jackson's Classical Electrodynamics
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
10K
Classical Source recommendation on Differential Geometry
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Classical How many of a chapter's problems do I do before moving to the next chapter?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Good graduate text in quantum mechanics
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
Same chapters from Griffiths being used for EM1 and EM2?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Studying Regarding learning from Griffiths
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K