Textbooks to be used as references for classical electromagnetism

Click For Summary
The discussion centers around the need for credible references in classical electromagnetism when preparing academic papers. The original poster faced rejection of their paper due to reliance on Wikipedia, which is deemed insufficient for scientific citations. Participants emphasize the importance of referencing established textbooks and articles to validate research. They recommend several key texts, including Wangsness's "Electromagnetic Fields," Jackson's "Classical Electrodynamics," and Schwinger's works, stressing that familiarity with these resources is crucial for understanding advanced topics like the Lorentz force and Poynting theorem. The conversation also highlights the limitations of Wikipedia, particularly for advanced subjects, and the necessity of engaging with primary literature to ensure the accuracy and originality of research. Additionally, there is a discussion about the appropriateness of referencing well-known formulas, with a consensus that proper citation etiquette should be followed, even for established concepts. Overall, the thread underscores the importance of rigorous academic standards in the field of electromagnetism.
  • #31
You can ask as well: How can a book be called modern when it brings Hamliton's principle and Noether's theorems as the last chapter of a textbook about E&M?

It's not modern at all, precisely for the reason you give. Landau and Lifshitz is much more modern. I often wonder, why usually they don't use the "relativity first" approach. Relativity makes E&M so much simpler, because it's the natural way to fromulate it. One answer is that the curricula of universities often don't follow a modern order of subjects.

I'd also teach non-relativistic quantum mechanics before E&M, because then you have a natural approach to the most usual systems of orthogonal functions, particularly spherical harmonics and all that, which you then can use for the more complicated system of vector fields in E&M.
 
  • Like
Likes TurboDiesel
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
vanhees71 said:
I'd also teach non-relativistic quantum mechanics before E&M, because then you have a natural approach to the most usual systems of orthogonal functions, particularly spherical harmonics and all that, which you then can use for the more complicated system of vector fields in E&M.

That's a good point, I never thought about that.
 
  • #33
vanhees71 said:
I'd also teach non-relativistic quantum mechanics before E&M, because then you have a natural approach to the most usual systems of orthogonal functions, particularly spherical harmonics and all that, which you then can use for the more complicated system of vector fields in E&M.
Well, there is nothing stopping you from reading about systems of orthogonal functions without studying quantum mechanics. They can be pretty useful in many other situations as well. In my program, the general theory of orthogonal functions is taught in a separate course. Examples include vibrating strings, pressure waves, diffusion, etc.
 
  • Like
Likes TurboDiesel and vanhees71
  • #34
Sure, but usually you don't introduce operators and algebraic methods in a standard E&M course.
 
  • #35
what about Electromagnetic field theory by Bo Thiede
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
10K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K