Video Lectures for Quantum Mechanics?

AI Thread Summary
Leonard Susskind offers a series of quantum mechanics lectures on YouTube through Stanford, which are recommended for upper-division undergraduates. For graduate-level content, a course available at pirsa.org is suggested. High school students express interest in these lectures, questioning their depth and suitability for serious study. Additionally, an entire quantum mechanics course from Oxford University is available on iTunes U, and other resources include a course from UCSD and NPTEL. These various options provide a range of materials for different educational levels in quantum mechanics.
physiker99
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
Are there any? If so, which are the best ones?

(Upper Division Undergrad)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Leonard Susskind has a series of lectures on youtube through Stanford:
If you are looking at graduate lectures I would recommend the following: http://pirsa.org/C09021/2
 
Last edited by a moderator:
thanks for links, kevin.
Graduate classses are way out of my league, but do you know if Susskind's lectures are just introductory or they cover QM topics in depth so that I can use them as a major source of study
 
I'm not sure, the fact is I'm a high school student so I'm probably not the best person to assess the quality of the lectures although I'm extremely interested in Physics and I usually know where to find the lectures and answer some of the less complex questions occasionally.
 
Last edited:
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top