Non-Jackson graduate E&M course?

  • Context: Courses 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ryan007
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Course E&m Graduate
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the use of different textbooks for graduate-level Electromagnetism (E&M) courses, specifically questioning the necessity of Jackson's textbook. Participants share their experiences with alternative texts and the challenges posed by Jackson's approach.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express frustration with Jackson's textbook, describing it as difficult to read and containing challenging problems.
  • One participant mentions using Landau and Lifgarbagez as an alternative graduate-level text, suggesting it may be a viable option.
  • Another participant shares their experience with Panofsky and Phillips, noting that while Jackson is common, their professor opted for a different text to avoid issues with students finding solutions online.
  • A participant recounts a course that initially used Jackson but switched to the professor's own problems due to student complaints, indicating that the difficulty level remained high.
  • One participant argues that Jackson's book focuses more on mathematical techniques rather than E&M concepts, suggesting that mastering difficult problems is essential for research.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the necessity of Jackson's textbook, with multiple competing views on the effectiveness of alternative texts and the challenges of the material.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the difficulty of Jackson's text and the potential for students to struggle with problem-solving, while others emphasize the importance of mathematical techniques in understanding E&M.

Who May Find This Useful

Graduate students in physics or related fields considering different textbooks for Electromagnetism courses, as well as educators looking for alternatives to Jackson's text.

Ryan007
Messages
14
Reaction score
1
Has anyone had any experience with a graduate E&M class that didn't use Jackson? Is Jackson necessary? I have it at home and it's a very difficult read and the problems are impossible. I have other E&M books and I can actually learn E&M from them.

My grad E&M class (master's program) didn't use Jackson (since very recently). I was wondering what I missed since it seems that almost every graduate E&M class uses it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The only other alternative text that I know of at the graduate level is the E&M text by Landau and Lifgarbagez.

Note that Jackson is difficult because the subject matter is difficult. Granted that he could be a bit more verbose with the text, but considering how much he covers in that text, it is no wonder that not many other textbook authors are willing to tackle that subject at that level.

Zz.
 
We used Panofsky and Phillips in the MS program I was in. Jackson was usual, but the prof thought that too many students were getting problem solutions off the net, so...

From what I've seen of Jackson, I'd have preferred it, but this wasn't a bad text and it was an order of magnitude cheaper. :-)
 
The first semester of my graduate E&M, we used Jackson. But people started complaining about the homework, so the professor stopped taking the problems from Jackson and substituted his own (he still used Jackson's notation and outline to teach the course). His problems were just as hard as Jackson's, but now we couldn't reference Homer Reid online. I don't think it's Jackson's fault that E&M sucks.
 
How do you ever intend to get any research done if you don't learn to solve an impossible problem or two?

Jackson is a math book, not an E&M book. You already know electrodynamics. What you don't know (probably) are the important mathematical techniques used to study partial differential equations in more general situations than the highly-symmetric setups found in Griffiths.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K