Weinberg's Lectures on Quantum Mechanics

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around Steven Weinberg's upcoming textbook on quantum mechanics, including its content, writing style, and comparison to other quantum mechanics texts. Participants express their opinions on the book's rigor, structure, and the author's reputation, as well as inquire about its publication details.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks information about the publication date and publisher of Weinberg's textbook, referencing a footnote from his recent paper.
  • Another participant praises the textbook, noting it is consistent with Weinberg's previous works.
  • Concerns are raised about the book's status as a standard reference compared to Ballentine's writing, suggesting it may not achieve the same level of recognition.
  • Some participants argue that the quality of a textbook should not solely depend on the author's accolades, although they acknowledge Weinberg's clear exposition and historical context in his writing.
  • Details are provided about the book's content, including its coverage of Hilbert-space formalism, operator algebra, and various interpretations of quantum theory, with a noted lack of a complete satisfactory interpretation.
  • Discussion includes the book's treatment of advanced topics such as angular momentum, perturbation theory, scattering theory, and entanglement, emphasizing its suitability for advanced graduate students.
  • One participant suggests that the mathematical rigor in Weinberg's book may be less than in Ballentine's, potentially omitting key results like the Stone-von Neumann uniqueness theorem.
  • A participant expresses intent to explore both Weinberg's and Ballentine's texts in the future.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of opinions regarding the quality and rigor of Weinberg's textbook compared to others, indicating that multiple competing views remain on its standing as a reference text. The discussion does not reach a consensus on its mathematical rigor or overall value.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight limitations in the mathematical rigor of Weinberg's book compared to other texts, suggesting that certain key results may not be included. The discussion also reflects varying preferences for teaching styles and content coverage in quantum mechanics.

murray92
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
In footnote 1 of his recent paper http://arxiv.org/pdf/1109.6462
Steven Weinberg promises
"1. This point involves too many issues to be treated adequately here. The
author’s views on the present state of quantum mechanics are spelled
out in detail in Section 3.7 of Lectures on Quantum Mechanics, to be
published."

Does anyone know when this will be published (or the publisher)- any pre-anouncements or anything?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I've just gotten this marvelous textbook. It's great as all texbooks by Weinberg before!
 
It must be well written, since it has the name of a Nobel prize winner on the cover but, by merely looking at the TOC, it won't be the standard reference for the subject, as his QFT books are...How would one rank it against Ballentine's top notch writing?
 
I'd not conclude that a textbook must be good, because it's written by a Nobel laureat, but in the case of Weinberg it's true. All his textbooks are just very well written with a clear exposition of the subject in a deductive way, which I myself always prefer compared to inductive expositions of a subject. Of course, also the history of science is important, and that's also covered by Weinberg in well written introductory chapters on the historical development of the theory.

Concerning the subjects covered the book is pretty standard for an advanced graduate course in non-relativistic quantum theory. All the important topics are covered, including a very clear foundation of the Hilbert-space formalism, which is used from the very beginning (after one chapter, where the hydrogen atom and the harmonic oscillator are treated in the wave-mechanical way).

In chapter 3 he gives a complete foundation of the quantum theoretical formalism in terms of the abstract Hilbert-space formulation, using symmetry arguments to establish the operator algebra of observables for non-relativistic quantum theory (i.e., using Galileo invariance as a starting point).

For me the most interesting part of chapter 3 is Sect. 3.7 on the interpretation of quantum theory, where after a very good summary about the various interpretations he finally comes to the conclusion that a complete satisfactory interpretation of the quantum theoretical formalism has not yet been achieved.

The rest of the book is simply a very good presentation of the standard material that any quantum mechanics course should cover, including the quantum mechanical description of angular momentum, time-independent and time-dependent perturbation theory, scattering theory (marvelous via the time-dependent wave-packet approach, which he has already used in his quantum theory of fields vol. 1 and which is, in my opinion, the only satisfactory derivation for the S-matrix anyway!).

The book closes with a concise exhibition of "non-relativistic QED", i.e., the quantized electromagnetic field coupled to "Schrödinger particles" and the final (unfortunately rather short) chapter about entanglement, discussing the interesting topics of EPR, the Bell inequalities, and quantum computing.

As usual with Weinberg's books, it's not written for beginners in the field but for the advanced graduate. These needs are better suited by Ballentines book, although also this one is rather tough for the beginner. Compared to Weinberg's book, in my opinion its main advantage is that also the mathematics of the rigged Hilbert space is developed to a certain extent.

For me, the best introductory text still is J.J. Sakurai, Modern Quantum Mechanics but Weinberg's is a must-reading for the more advanced scholar!
 
So in your opinion, the level of mathematical rigurosity is less compared to Ballentine (not to mention Gallindo and Pascual's 2 volume text), which automatically means some key results such as the Stone-von Neumann's uniqueness theorem are left out.

P.S. Perhaps not so unrelated, a nice review article last month on arxiv: http://arxiv.org/abs/1211.5627
 
Thanks for your replies :-). I will definitely check it out, maybe in the spring or during christmas break.
(I will have a look at valentines book too)
 

Similar threads

  • Sticky
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
12K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
7K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 710 ·
24
Replies
710
Views
47K
  • · Replies 76 ·
3
Replies
76
Views
9K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K