Undergraduate modern physics and condensed matter physics courses

In summary: The focus was more of the pragmatic nature, how to calculate stuff in QM not so much into different interpretations and stuff. "If you can not calculate it, don't ask about it" was the attitude so to say.The Quantum Mechanics book by Griffiths often seems to confuse students, given from my impression in the quantum section of this forum. I don't know the book very well. So I can't say for sure, whether it's really that bad though.My class was based on the Griffiths book, and I did not like.A bit of background. I majored in Pure Mathematics, and not physics. Which resulted in me taking physics classes for fun. Anyhow, I
  • #1
planck999
21
6
Do they really teach and help anything? I am taking them for my nanoengineering undergraduate program. The textbooks are solid state physics by j r hook and concepts of modern physics by mcgraw hill and r b singh introduction to modern physics and introduction to quantum mechanics by david j griffiths
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Courses do not teach by themselves.

I have some difficulty what you are really after. Are you meaning if they help you become a better nanoengineer, prepared for grad school or what?
 
  • #3
drmalawi said:
Courses do not teach by themselves.

I have some difficulty what you are really after. Are you meaning if they help you become a better nanoengineer, prepared for grad school or what?
All of them also do they really teach quantum mechanics at advanced level?
 
  • #4
planck999 said:
All of them also do they really teach quantum mechanics at advanced level?

Those courses no, modern physics is more about getting a feeling for what's to come. Solid state is usually a very broad course where you get many appetizers for what is out there - usually don't go too deep in any of the subject matters and thus covers everything from crystal structure, heat capacity, band structure of solids, electric and magnetic pheonomena.
 
  • #5
The Quantum Mechanics book by Griffiths often seems to confuse students, given from my impression in the quantum section of this forum. I don't know the book very well. So I can't say for sure, whether it's really that bad though.
 
  • #6
vanhees71 said:
The Quantum Mechanics book by Griffiths often seems to confuse students, given from my impression in the quantum section of this forum.

Aren't students confused about intro QM in general? ;) And Griffiths is the far most popular book(?)
 
  • #7
I don't know, why this book is so popular. Given the confusion of the students, it's a bit surprising that it is. In a way you are right in saying that intro QM is confusing. It's not so much the math, which is less complicated than for the the usually before taught classical electrodynamics, but the way of thinking you have to adapt from classical to quantum physics a lot. If the students are, however, confused by the math of the book, it's even more difficult!
 
  • Like
Likes malawi_glenn
  • #8
My first in QM used Introduction to Quantum Mechanics by Phillips, it was an okay book and we had a good teacher. Seconds course we used Sakurai and also a very good teacher. I did not like the sakurai book that much, mostly because of the typesetting I think. I heard there is a newer edition now though.

The focus was more of the pragmatic nature, how to calculate stuff in QM not so much into different interpretations and stuff. "If you can not calculate it, don't ask about it" was the attitude so to say.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
  • #9
vanhees71 said:
The Quantum Mechanics book by Griffiths often seems to confuse students, given from my impression in the quantum section of this forum. I don't know the book very well. So I can't say for sure, whether it's really that bad though.
My class was based on the Griffiths book, and I did not like.

A bit of background. I majored in Pure Mathematics, and not physics. Which resulted in me taking physics classes for fun. Anyhow, I liked Griffiths Electrodynamics book. But Griffiths in his quantum book, avoids mathematics, which makes the book obfuscating. Not to mention the too chatty nature of book. Reminds me of Gilberts Strang Linear Algebra in that regards. I found both of these two books terrible. Moreover, it was hard to do the exercises, without looking at supplementary books. Griffiths did not contain all the material needed to answer them, or building on previous exercises. One can look at the solutions, but as a math major, I picked up the habit of never looking at them. Which is a bit ridiculous since most of the problems in Griffiths were easy, once reading the relavent sections in Shankar.

I mainly supplemented with Shankar, which I believe, is a superior book.

But maybe too hard for Engineering students?
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
  • #10
vanhees71 said:
The Quantum Mechanics book by Griffiths often seems to confuse students
Isn't it a good thing? Because, as Bohr told us, if you are not confused by QM, you have not understood it. :wink:

More seriously
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07G15LW25/?tag=pfamazon01-20
More than 1100 ratings, average mark 4.6 out of 5. I think many are confused only because many read it.
 
  • Like
Likes malawi_glenn
  • #11
Well, it's sometimes very surprising, which books get good rankings at Amazon. I had a look at it and didn't want to have it. The same goes with Zee's QFT in a nutshell.
 
  • #12
I kinda like Zee it was my second exposore. My first was peskin and schroder and i did not like it, too many details skipped. My first love was srednicki
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71

Related to Undergraduate modern physics and condensed matter physics courses

1. What is the difference between undergraduate modern physics and condensed matter physics courses?

Undergraduate modern physics courses typically cover a broad range of topics in modern physics, including quantum mechanics, relativity, and nuclear physics. Condensed matter physics courses, on the other hand, focus specifically on the study of the physical properties of matter in its condensed phases, such as solids and liquids.

2. What are some common topics covered in undergraduate modern physics and condensed matter physics courses?

Some common topics covered in these courses include quantum mechanics, electromagnetism, thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, and solid state physics. Students may also learn about specific phenomena such as superconductivity and magnetism.

3. What skills are necessary for success in undergraduate modern physics and condensed matter physics courses?

Students should have a strong foundation in mathematics, particularly calculus and linear algebra. They should also have a good understanding of basic physics principles, such as Newton's laws and conservation of energy. Critical thinking and problem-solving skills are also important for success in these courses.

4. Are there any recommended prerequisites for taking undergraduate modern physics and condensed matter physics courses?

While specific prerequisites may vary depending on the university or program, it is generally recommended to have a strong background in introductory physics and mathematics courses. Some schools may also require students to have taken courses in classical mechanics and electromagnetism before enrolling in modern physics or condensed matter physics courses.

5. What career opportunities are available for students who take undergraduate modern physics and condensed matter physics courses?

Graduates of these courses may pursue careers in a variety of fields, including research and development, materials science, engineering, and academia. They may also find opportunities in industries such as electronics, energy, and healthcare. Additionally, the critical thinking and problem-solving skills developed in these courses can be valuable in many other professions.

Similar threads

  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
9
Views
894
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
10
Views
654
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
11
Views
784
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
4
Views
934
  • STEM Academic Advising
2
Replies
49
Views
4K
  • Atomic and Condensed Matter
Replies
3
Views
256
Back
Top