Should I take Quantum Mechanics?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a student in their second year of an undergraduate Nanotechnology program contemplating whether to take a third-year quantum mechanics course. Concerns are raised about the student's mathematical background, which includes first-year algebra, differential calculus, and integral calculus, but lacks classical mechanics. The course uses "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by David J. Griffiths, and participants emphasize the importance of understanding topics like angular momentum, Maxwell's equations, and vector calculus for success in quantum mechanics. Suggestions include self-studying relevant mathematics and physics over the summer and assessing the textbook to identify weak areas. The necessity of quantum mechanics for future work in nanotechnology is highlighted, alongside the potential challenges of the course due to its intellectual demands. Overall, the consensus leans towards the student attempting the course while preparing adequately in advance.
The-Exiled
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
Hey,

I'm currently in my second year of an undergraduate degree in Nanotechnology. I have the option of do a 3rd year quantum mechanics subject. The problem is I have only done first year level mathematics and have not done classical mechanics (Although, I have done a second year Modern Physics subject and a vibrations and waves subject). I was just wondering if I should not take the subject because I won't have the mathematical background required to do well?

Any help will be much appreciated.
Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What textbook does the QM course use, and what does "first year level mathematics" include in your system? I assume you're not in the USA.
 
For the physics part, you'll need an understanding of topics like angular momentum and central forces. In a second half of a year QM course, you'll probably need an understanding of Maxwell's equations in differental form, and particularly the vector potential.

On the math side, the vibrations and waves course will be useful if it included Fourier methods and simple boundary value problems, but you'll also need to know some vector calculus, some linear algebra and matrix algebra.

You might be able to make up deficiencies as you go along if you are not otherwise overloaded, but remember that QM is already a very intellectually challenging subject aside from much of the mathematical methods used.
 
I'm no expert, but won't QM be practically essential if you want to carry on working with nanotechnology after your degree?
 
jtbell said:
What textbook does the QM course use, and what does "first year level mathematics" include in your system? I assume you're not in the USA.

The mathematics that I have done are: Algebra (With matrices), differential calculus, series and integral calculus. I'm from Australia. :)

The textbook for the subject is "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by David J. Griffiths.

xGAME-OVERx said:
I'm no expert, but won't QM be practically essential if you want to carry on working with nanotechnology after your degree?

I know right? Thats why I think I should be doing it.

@Daverz, We have done Fourier methods in the vibrations and waves. Should I attempt to learn the maths/physics over the summer before the subject begins?
 
Is this the program?

http://www.flinders.edu.au/courses/rules/undergrad/bschnn.cfm#programofstudy

Or maybe one of the others listed here:

http://www.nanowerk.com/nanotechnology/degree_plist.php?progtype=b

I think I'd wait until after you've had linear algebra and diff eqs and completed the Physics prereqs if you haven't already. Is there a scheduling reason for taking the QM course early?

You could also check out the text and see how far you can get in it.
 
Last edited:
Last edited by a moderator:
How good is the professor? If you don't understand some math do you know someone who can help?
 
The-Exiled said:
This is the program:
I don't have a choice of doing any higher level mathematics than the first year... So unless I do the mathematics myself, I won't learn it.

I'd start working through the course textbook so you can find out where your background feels weak. I'd say up through chapter 4 should give you a good idea.

Griffiths gives some recommendations for background reading in the preface to his book:

http://www.physics.umd.edu/courses/Phys270/Jenkins/Griffiths_EPR_BellInequality_Excerpt.pdf
 

Similar threads

Back
Top