1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Name Of A Good Quantum Mechanics Book?

  1. Jul 17, 2012 #1
    I want a name of a good Quantum Mechanics book, that has good exercises (it is not necessary that both be in the same textbook).
    All what I can inform you of is that this will be my first Quantum Mechanics course for a third year physicist.
    Thanks.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 17, 2012 #2

    micromass

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor
    2016 Award

    Last edited by a moderator: May 6, 2017
  4. Jul 17, 2012 #3
    Personally, I like books with rather detailed derivations and explanations, diagrams are not that important in QM as there really isn't anything to visualize, as opposed to maybe SR or GR (The manifold and space-time diagrams are essential to forming an intuitive understanding of these 2 theories).
    Stay away from those math-lite texts, they'll just frustrate you and waste your money.
     
  5. Jul 17, 2012 #4
    I second micromass' suggestion, zettili's book is a good one!
    And what GarageDweller said, stay far away from griffiths' QM book

    If you're already comfortable with some okay linear algebra and juggling about with awkward integrals you might want to check out shankar's principles of quantum mechanics, it's a little more advanced than zettili but it also has a lot more explaination and exposition which I find quite nice in an introductory textbook. Shankar's book also has good exercises and some hints if you get stuck.

    There's also Landau and Lifgarbagez' book with is a bit older and follows very strictly the wave mechanics approach, it also has a fair amount of exposition and it deals with the classical limit quite early on which is something a lot of QM textbooks miss out on (Shankar does have a chapter on it but it is still pretty short).
     
  6. Jul 18, 2012 #5
    Thanks for your answers. And please genericusrnme, why stay away from griffiths' QM book?
    I have a good mathematical background, but honestly I have no idea what QM talks about? Is it highly mathematics dependent?
     
  7. Jul 18, 2012 #6
    For a rebuttal of this statement, refer to The Road to Reality, by Roger Penrose, Chapters 21-24, I think especially the intro to chapter 22, where Penrose calls it "a pity" to take such an attitude.

    I agree diagrams are less important, but I disagree that there isn't anything to visualize.
     
  8. Jul 18, 2012 #7
    You need to be fairly comfortable with Linear Algebra: matrixes, eigenvalues and eigenvectors, linear operators etc. Also it helps habing a strong backround in differential equations (both ODEs and PDEs)

    To learn basic QM you need to know classical mechanics. If you want to go deeper, you might wanna study EM.
     
  9. Jul 18, 2012 #8
    I kept hearing about that quantum book Zettili so I checked it out. It's amazing!! It's the best quantum book I've ever read. It's not really advanced enough for a full graduate course but I would of LOVED to have used that as an undergraduate.
     
  10. Jul 18, 2012 #9
    Because it is one of those books that attempts to do "quantum mechanics for dummies" the result is a book that contains inconsistencies (iirc at one point he DEFINES something one way and later asks as an exercise 'is this always the case') and handwaving proofs of theorems. Schrodingers equation is simply introduced with no mention as to where it came from.. It's just a horrid book for anyone who wants to understand the subject rather than just remember, as he sais, 'what mathematicians tell us the answer is' and spew out answers to stock questions in an exam.

    You should be okay, QM at the level of Zettili and Shankar requires you know how to play about with some tricky integrals (pretty much just gaussian integrals) and understand some linear algebra, hermitian matrices having real eigenvalues and orthogonal eigenvectors etc and the notion that functions also form a vectorspace. If you know that you should be alright!
     
  11. Jul 20, 2012 #10
    Thanks, you were very helpful.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Name Of A Good Quantum Mechanics Book?
Loading...