What are some suggestions for books that explain electromagnetic theory?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on finding accessible books that explain electromagnetic theory for those with limited prior knowledge. Participants suggest several titles, including "The Feynman Lectures, Volume II," which covers E&M concepts but lacks exercises, and Schwartz's "Principles of Electrodynamics," noted for its affordability and self-contained nature. Griffith's undergraduate textbook is also recommended for its clarity. Additionally, a free advanced resource is mentioned, available online. Overall, the thread emphasizes the need for books that cater to varying levels of understanding in electromagnetic theory.
NUMB_NUTS
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Hi, could anyone please let me know of any books that explain electromagnetic theory.
Unfortunately a lot of books seem to be written for people who already know the subject well.Probably teaching aids i think. I am in s/e/asia but not a problem as i can always look up ebay. any suggestions please.

many thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How well do you know the subject already? How well do you want to know it after your read?
 
There are tons of E&M books. Is there some emphasis in particular you were looking for? What mathematical level are you looking for? Do you want more of a physics emphasis, or more of an engineering emphasis?

The Feynman Lectures, Volume II is very good on E&M (though some topics like radiation, interference, diffraction, and polarization are actually covered in volume I, before Maxwell's equations are introduced). No exercises, though

At the risk of sounding like I have stock in Dover books, I'll recommend Schwartz's Principles of Electrodynamics again. It's at the upper-division undergraduate level, but self-contained. He uses Gaussian units. It's a very inexpensive paperback. Dover has a lot of E&M books you might browse if you can find them in a bookstore. I think Rojansky is one of the simpler ones.

I've heard very good things about Griffith's undergraduate textbook.
 
many thanks i'll take a look and hopefully they will be of help.

Cheers.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top