Learning physics beyond classical mechanics without labs?

[elias001]

I am in math and going through physics on my own by doing the exercises in a typical texts.

I am going to be at quantum mechanics soon. The thing is, if I don't have a chance at taking lab courses in quantum mechanics, will that affect physical understanding of the subject? I don't know if people working in theory are require to have a working knowledge of the experimental side of their subject but in quantum mechanics or in atomic physics, etc.

I don't know the difference if compare with engineering physics to physics, students in the former would get more lab time or if having more lab time for a subject course will affect a student's concrete understanding of the subject.

I took first year physics and I like the lab components like doing experiments having to do with waves, and stuff with pulleys, etc. I don't have space for lab course. :(

Thank you in advance.

 

[weirdoguy]

if I don't have a chance at taking lab courses in quantum mechanics, will that affect physical understanding of the subject?

I don't think so. Personally, I hated all labs, I did the bare minimum, I threw a wild party after the last lab, and I don't think it affected my understanding. But you know, I knew since high school that I wanted to be theoretical physicist. What I think you HAVE to do is tons of exercises. Especially on topics you don't 'feel' very well.

 

[FactChecker]

You can probably get as much from YouTube videos of the experiments.

As far as understanding quantum mechanics, keep this quote in mind:
"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics."
-- Richard Feynman

 

[weirdoguy]

keep this quote in mind

Keep also in mind that's only Feynmans opinion, and it highly depends on what one means by "understand" and some other philosophical assumptions.

 

[FactChecker]

Keep also in mind that's only Feynmans opinion, and it highly depends on what one means by "understand" and some other philosophical assumptions.

Good point. But if Feynman didn't "understand" it, few people can.
IMHO, the different interpretations of quantum theory are bewildering.

 

[elias001]

@FactChecker when i aak about concrete intuition, I am referring to say as an expample, in the Schrodinger PDE, where there is superpositions of particles, or the collapse of the wave function. Even though both are math details, would my real world understanding of them be affected if I have never performed actual experiments illustrating what is described in the mathematics. Maybe I am using wrong examples, but I am under the assumption/impression in most of undergraduate physics text, every concept learned from textbooks, there should be a corresponding experimental demonstration of that concept just like in newtonian and fluid mechanics, or similarly, any physical phenomena at a macro scale.

 

[TensorCalculus]

@FactChecker when i aak about concrete intuition, I am referring to say as an expample, in the Schrodinger PDE, where there is superpositions of particles, or the collapse of the wave function. Even though both are math details, would my real world understanding of them be affected if I have never performed actual experiments illustrating what is described in the mathematics. Maybe I am using wrong examples, but I am under the assumption/impression in most of undergraduate physics text, every concept learned from textbooks, there should be a corresponding experimental demonstration of that concept just like in newtonian and fluid mechanics, or similarly, any physical phenomena at a macro scale.

Hmm... I don't know if this will help, but there are some good science videos online? As mentioned in post #3 YouTube videos can help a lot.

Physics with Elliot is a nice channel to see how things like the Feynman path integral end up collapsing into our classical laws of physics in the macroscopic world, and ZAP physics has some nice QM videos. There's even a 3b1b video or two with some nice visualisations of quantum things. They may be too basic for you though, give them a try.

Most common lab practicals can be found on YouTube anyway, from my (limited) experience.

 

[symbolipoint]

Post #6, #7; reaction is that Physics without laboratory support exercises is just sad.

 

[TensorCalculus]

Post #6, #7; reaction is that Physics without laboratory support exercises is just sad.

Access to labs are pretty limited when you're self studying everything . It's better than letting lack of labs stop you and not doing the physics at all!

 

[weirdoguy]

reaction is that Physics without laboratory support exercises is just sad.

I was sad doing those lab exercises. I know you are right in principle, but in practice some people just don't like labs and don't gain anything from them. I was the best student in the whole faculty twice (first and second year, I started heavy partying in the third year...) so I don't think that my antipathy really interfered with my understanding of physics.

But I know I'm an expetion. I also wrote both my bachelor and master theses without really consulting both of my advisors. And both of them were happy with the results with no corrections. I wonder what could I achieve if clinical depression and addiction didn't show up in my life...

 

[FactChecker]

when i aak about concrete intuition, I am referring to say as an expample, in the Schrodinger PDE, where there is superpositions of particles, or the collapse of the wave function. Even though both are math details, would my real world understanding of them be affected if I have never performed actual experiments illustrating what is described in the mathematics.

Those are the examples that are notoriously counter-intuitive. Experts argue about what the experiments really mean and often have to fall back on the math to say "that's just the way it is".

 

[FactChecker]

This thread might be relevant: Physicists disagree wildly on what quantum mechanics says about real…

 

[Muu9]

 

[elias001]

@FactChecker what about everything else in quantum mechanics that physicists agree on. If i don't get to perform any physical experiments on any of those topics, be they from basic, intermediate or advanced level courses, will it be missing much?? I don't know how it is compare tp learning in math. Trying out, creating and going through computational examples are the equivalence of experiments in physics. I know there is also the topic of monte Carlo simulations. But i am discounting those since at basic and intermediate level quantum mechanics at least, there must be important historical experiments that are relevant for illustrating theories at either of those levels. So if I have never gone through redoing those historical experiments, what will I be missing out on?? There is also the issue of whether redoing historical experiments using modern equipment is a tool to build intuition in a subject in the hard sciences, in this case physics at the atomic level.

 

[TensorCalculus]

@FactChecker what about everything else in quantum mechanics that physicists agree on. If i don't get to perform any physical experiments on any of those topics, be they from basic, intermediate or advanced level courses, will it be missing much?? I don't know how it is compare tp learning in math. Trying out, creating and going through computational examples are the equivalence of experiments in physics. I know there is also the topic of monte Carlo simulations. But i am discounting those since at basic and intermediate level quantum mechanics at least, there must be important historical experiments that are relevant for illustrating theories at either of those levels. So if I have never gone through redoing those historical experiments, what will I be missing out on?? There is also the issue of whether redoing historical experiments using modern equipment is a tool to build intuition in a subject in the hard sciences, in this case physics at the atomic level.

Hmm. Just how much do they agree on though.

Honestly, I still stand by my opinion that you won't miss much. Worst case scenario you watch Youtube videos of famous practicals: Youtube has some really nice simulations and explanations that can help you on your QM journey. I've been able to learn physics just fine (I think) and I'm completely self-taught: the only practicals I've done physically are in school, years after I've learnt the concepts that those practicals were trying to illustrate. Many people have taught themselves QM through a textbook like Griffiths without doing lab exercises.

Maybe give these videos a watch and see if they help at all. These are high-level overviews of some quantum ideas...
Intro to the Feynman Path Integral
Intro to Wavefunctions
Of course, these types of videos are only useful at the very beginning when you are starting your QM journey, but I am just trying to make the point that there are countless YouTube videos out there that either have videoed the practical happening IRL or they have made animations of the practical and explained the whole formula/concept like the ones linked above. Considering the abundance of videos like this on the internet, I see no reason for you to worry so much about not having lab practicals.

That being said, I've never experienced learning new concepts an doing physical practicals alongside them whilst you are learning. Maybe it is a better experience, I don't know. But I think I am getting on just fine without lab practicals, so my verdict will remain that they are not essential for you to learn QM.

 

[bhobba]

IMHO, the different interpretations of quantum theory are bewildering.

They are.

But before undertaking that journey, learn QM to the level of Ballentine.

Then, when examining interpretations, you will find many, while not wrong, that miss the point. According to Ballentine, you only really need two postulates (there are others, but they naturally follow; it is fun to find them in Ballentine). Additionally, there is the important Gleason's theorem, which leaves you scratching your head as to why probabilities are an issue. However, that is for you to 'figure out'.

Thanks
Bill

 

[Rive]

...if I don't have a chance at taking lab courses in quantum mechanics, will that affect physical understanding of the subject?

Understanding experiments helps but the ability of conducting them is not necessarily a requirement.
Actually, experiments (designing, executing and interpreting them) may be even a specialisation in itself.

 

[elias001]

@Rive wait, can you elaborate more on "Actually, experiments (designing, executing and interpreting them) may be even a specialisation in itself."? I am guessing you stated that only for people who want to work in the experimental side of the subject. Is that correct?

My interest is ultimately applying quantum mechanics in the study of other branch of physics like E&M, optics and phtonics. I know there are people in solid state physics or astronomy who need to know quantum mechanics, or even a working knowledge of it. I am just wondering how many past historically significant and modern experiments they did not get to redo and by not doing them, how has it affect the development of their intuition in the subject.

 

[Rive]

I am guessing you stated that only for people who want to work in the experimental side of the subject. Is that correct?

I've been hinting that this part (experiments) of physics is deep and wide enough in itself to be considered (and sometimes it is indeed offered as) specialization.
Usually you can chose specializations without getting involved too deep into other ones.

The issue here is, that:

My interest is ultimately applying quantum mechanics in the study of other branch of physics like E&M, optics and phtonics

...these are also deep and wide enough, and relevant QM is inherently part of them already.