Other What are you reading now? (STEM only)

[Auto-Didact]

Don't know if this counts, but since Landau damping was mentioned it reminded me that I just finished Cedric Villani's "Birth of a Theorem: A Mathematical Adventure".

How was it? Been following him for awhile now.

Landau damping is perhaps the best example of an extremely broad mathematical model with applications going far beyond just physics. AFAIK, the mathematical theory hasn't been fully understood yet, with the still uncovered underlying mathematics remaining a breeding ground for novel forms of mathematical unification.

 

[martinbn]

How was it? Been following him for awhile now.

Landau damping is perhaps the best example of an extremely broad mathematical model with applications going far beyond just physics. AFAIK, the mathematical theory hasn't been fully understood yet, with the still uncovered underlying mathematics remaining a breeding ground for novel forms of mathematical unification.

It is good, but I don't think that anyone who is not already familiar with how math/science is done will get the right impression. I can imagine someone saying "I know exactly how he feels, it was the same for me when I was studying for my calc 101 midterm."

 

[Lynch101]

I made an attempt to read the Problem of Time: Quantum Mechanics versus General Relativity by Dr. Edward Anderson. Unfortunately, I don't have any mathematical background, so the majority of it was over my head, but I was still able to get a lot out of it.

It's a very comprehensive breakdown of the Problem of Time (PoT) in Qunatum Gravity. It looks at the different facets of the PoT and how each proposed theory attempts to address them. It draws on earlier reviews of the PoT by Isham and Kuchaˇr.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

Just reading Grensing, Structural Aspects of Quantum Field Theory (2 volumes, more than 1600 pages).

I assume it's another take of a mathematician of QFT.

Have you read Zeidler's three volumes on QFT?
I think he he wanted to publish another more two volumes on QFT, but unfortunately he died in 2016 before publishing them.

 

[Demystifier]

I assume it's another take of a mathematician of QFT.

Have you read Zeidler's three volumes on QFT?
I think he he wanted to publish another more two volumes on QFT, but unfortunately he died in 2016 before publishing them.

Zeidler is much more mathematical than Grensing. I didn't like Zeidler for the reason that his books are a mess; the chapters, sections and subsections do not seem to be ordered logically.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

Zeidler is much more mathematical than Grensing. I didn't like Zeidler for the reason that his books are a mess; the chapters, sections and subsections do not seem to be ordered logically.

Can you elaborate on what is not logical in the ordering?

 

[George Jones]

I assume it's another take of a mathematician of QFT.

Have you read Zeidler's three volumes on QFT?

Zeidler is much more mathematical than Grensing. I didn't like Zeidler ...

With respect to maths books on QFT, I like Follands's book, and I await with with eager anticipation the publication of Michel Talagrand's book. It appears that Talagrand subscribes to Victor Weisskopf's"uncover a little" as opposed to "cover a lot" philosophy of pedagogy; see the Table of Contents and Introduction to Talagrand's book:

http://michel.talagrand.net/qft.pdf

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

With respect to maths books on QFT, I like Follands's book, and I await with with eager anticipation the publication of Michel Talagrand's book. It appears that Talagrand subscribes to Victor Weisskopf's"uncover a little" as opposed to "cover a lot" philosophy of pedagogy; see the Table of Contents and Introduction to Talagrand's book:

http://michel.talagrand.net/qft.pdf

I have both Ticciati's and Folland's as well.
I find it quite amazing that you can find insights on the subject (QFT) from several different authors. It just tells you how vast this subject is.
Sometimes I think that every mathematical tool is being used in QFT and quantum gravity theories.
Which is great, but hard to grasp it in a few years.

 

[Demystifier]

Can you elaborate on what is not logical in the ordering?

Example 1: The second book is called "Quantum Electrodynamics", but actual quantum electrodynamics starts at the page 771.

Example 2: Special relativity is treated in detail in the third book called "Gauge Theory" (Chapters 18-20), while it would be much more logical to treat it in the first book called "Basics in Mathematics and Physics".

Do yo want more?

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

Example 1: The second book is called "Quantum Electrodynamics", but actual quantum electrodynamics starts at the page 771.

Example 2: Special relativity is treated in detail in the third book called "Gauge Theory" (Chapters 18-20), while it would be much more logical to treat it in the first book called "Basics in Mathematics and Physics".

Do yo want more?

Well for example 1, I guess he covers all the mathematics that one needs to know before tackling QED which sounds to me reasonable; the same with example 2.

What would you prefer? first giving you all the physics combined with the necessary math, or first the math and then the physics.

It doesn't sound to me as a terrible choice that he had done.
It's not like Peskin and Schroeder that they pour on you the math with the physics, and you don't understand what are the exact mathematical definitions they are using.

But yes, SR should be before QED.

 

[Demystifier]

Well for example 1, I guess he covers all the mathematics that one needs to know before tackling QED which sounds to me reasonable; the same with example 2.

He also covers a lot of math that he does not use in actual QED at all.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

He also covers a lot of math that he does not use in actual QED at all.

What for example?
Surely not any set theory and mathematical logic there, right?

 

[Demystifier]

What for example?
Surely not any set theory and mathematical logic there, right?

For example, Chapter 4 on equivalence classes is not used in the actual QED part.

Some additional examples. Chapter 4 (of the second book) is nominally about equivalence classes, but Secs. 4.5 and 4.6 have noting to do with equivalence classes.

 

[George Jones]

For example, Chapter 4 on equivalence classes is not used in the actual QED part.

Equivalence classed are used in QED for Gupta-Bleuler quantization. Zeidler defines the relevant space of equivalence classes somewhat implicitly and very briefly in the last line of page 830. The brief book "Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Field Theory: A Mathematical Primer" by Dimock define the quotient space of equivalence classes more explicitly.

 

[fresh_42]

Equivalence classes are hidden everywhere: Cauchy sequences for completeness of Hilbert spaces, various representations of the SU groups as quotient groups, outer product spaces etc.

 

[Demystifier]

So is there someone here who thinks that organization and ordering in the Zeidler QFT books is not a mess?

 

[George Jones]

So is there someone here who thinks that organization and ordering in the Zeidler QFT books is not a mess?

I strongly suspect that you are right about this, but I find Zeldler's 3000+ pages to be so overwhelming that, even though all three volumes are on my shelf, I have made no systematic attempt to read large portions of them. I have read read selected small portions.

 

[jordi]

So is there someone here who thinks that organization and ordering in the Zeidler QFT books is not a mess?

I agree. In fact, volume I was better organized. Of course I do not know, but it could be that Zeidler was becoming old and tired (he passed away a few years ago, without publishing the 4th, 5th and 6th promised volumes).

Also, he promised some things in volume 2 and 3 (in volume 1), and he did not deliver.

It is a pity, because his intentions were really good, I liked his style a lot.

 

[Demystifier]

I think the Zeidler's QFT books should be retitled as:
Some Aspects of Mathematics, Physics and Their Interrelationship with an Ariadne Thread in Quantum Field Theory

More seriously, I think his books should not be read as textbooks, but rather as a series of review papers.

 

[George Jones]

More seriously, I think his books should not be read as textbooks, but rather as a series of review papers.

Yes, e.g.,
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/continuous-eigenvalues.428384/#post-2880479

 

[Demystifier]

Yes, e.g.,

And your signature is particularly valid for the Zeidler's books. One should not read them linearly from cover to cover, instead one should skim over the Contents and pick (sub)sections that make one feel curious at the moment.

 

[CosmicEgyptian19]

I am reading a book called Idiot's Guide to Quantum Physics by Marc Humphrey and some other people. I became interested in this topic after learning about the double slit experiment. This is also my first answer to something on this website, did I do it right?

 

[doggydan42]

I'm reading Sakurai's Quantum Mechanics and an Introduction to Tensors and Group Theory for Physicists by Nadir Jeevanjee.

 

[Jimster41]

“Quantum Field Theory of Many Body Systems”
Xiao-Gang Wen

That is to say I have understood and enjoyed both the preface and first chapter... that may well be all.

 

[member 587159]

I'm currently reading Abstract Algebra by Dummit and Foote to expand my knowledge on abstract algebra. It is a great book which I can recommend. It contains many examples, tricks, and highlights what is really important to remember. It has too many exercises to make them all, so I pick the ones that seem more interesting or harder.

Currently, I am at p145 which deals with groups and the Sylow theorems. I hope to get to ring theory soon and if there is time left I hope to begin with module theory.

 

[Klystron]

I visit my local library once a week usually picking up books I reserve online. Today with no books on hold I revisited a method from childhood by wandering in the Science and Math section looking for books I have not read recently. The stacks were full as most local schools are on Summer hiatus.

I chose "The Magic Of Math" by Arthur Benjamin and "The Island of Knowledge" by Marcelo Gleiser for summer reading then was bemused to find a 2001 Cambridge Press math textbook by an author familiar to us all on Physics Forums. I added "Introduction to Numerical Analysis" by Arnold Neumaier. @A. Neumaier , I presume?

[Later feedback: "The Magic of Math" is a highly readable gateway to counting and combinatorics among other subjects. "Island of Knowledge" seems aimed at beginning knowledge engineers and students of epistemology. "Intro to Numerical Analysis" is a focused comprehensive overview of the field as the title promises and the author delivers.]

 

[A. Neumaier]

I visit my local library once a week usually picking up books I reserve online. Today with no books on hold I revisited a method from childhood by wandering in the Science and Math section looking for books I have not read recently. The stacks were full as most local schools are on Summer hiatus.

I chose "The Magic Of Math" by Arthur Benjamin and "The Island of Knowledge" by Marcelo Gleiser for summer reading then was bemused to find a 2001 Cambridge Press math textbook by an author familiar to us all on Physics Forums. I added "Introduction to Numerical Analysis" by Arnold Neumaier. @A. Neumaier , I presume?

Yes. Happy reading!

 

[MidgetDwarf]

Yes. Happy reading!

From the book description on Amazon and the few pages I was able to read. The book looks promising. Does is it presuppose knowledge of Complex Analysis (the one a math major takes (pure)) as a prerequisite?

 

[A. Neumaier]

From the book description on Amazon and the few pages I was able to read. The book looks promising. Does is it presuppose knowledge of Complex Analysis (the one a math major takes (pure)) as a prerequisite?

Not for most of the material, only for the derivation of a few details.

 

[MidgetDwarf]

Not for most of the material, only for the derivation of a few details.

Thank you for replying. Will start reading it in December.

 

[Mark44]

I'm currently reading a couple of books I've found about the Lisp programming language: ANSI Common Lisp, by Paul Graham, and LISP, 3rd Edition, by Patrick Henry Winston and Berthold Klaus Horn.

What motivated me to start learning Lisp was a blog post by Joel Spolsky titled "The Perils of JavaSchools" (https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2005/12/29/the-perils-of-javaschools-2/). In the post Spolsky says there's nothing wrong with Java as a language to write applications, but as a language taught in university computer science courses, it's too easy.

A quote from the article:

Instead what I’d like to claim is that Java is not, generally, a hard enough programming language that it can be used to discriminate between great programmers and mediocre programmers.

In the article, Spolsky praises functional programming languages such as Lisp and Scheme, so I thought it would be good for me to take a look.

 

[Dragon27]

I'm currently reading a couple of books I've found about the Lisp programming language: ANSI Common Lisp, by Paul Graham, and LISP, 3rd Edition, by Patrick Henry Winston and Berthold Klaus Horn.

Don't forget to check out the freely available On Lisp by Paul Graham (which is the next logical step after ANSI CL). It takes a deeper look at more advanced techniques of macro programming in Lisp, which is probably what Lisp is all about.

 

[Aufbauwerk 2045]

In addition to the Lisp books already mentioned, I recommend the following.

The original paper by McCarthy.

McCarthy was asked why he invented Lisp. He said it was for artificial intelligence. One reason is because code and data have the same syntax. But this has uses beyond AI.

Currently I use Lisp for metaprogramming, as opposed to coding directly in C++. It's a good language choice when you need a translator between one language and another. I also use Lisp in other ways, but they are secret projects. ;)

The Elements of Artificial Intelligence Using Common Lisp by Steven Tanimoto

Problem Solving and Artificial Intelligence by Lauriere. See chapter 2 for his discussion of Lisp and why it is useful in AI.

Common Lisp, The Langauge by Guy Steele

There are some good Youtube videos on Lisp, including interviews with John McCarthy and demonstrations of those old Lisp machines.

This page contains a link at the bottom to a paper by McCarthy on the History of Lisp.

If you want to try some Lisp programming, which I highly recommend, then consider CLISP which is easy to download and install. Or if you prefer a Windows GUI you may wish to try LispWorks. They have Personal and Hobbyist editions. I haven't used it but it looks interesting.

There is also Scheme and Clojure, which are variants of Lisp.

This is an interesting story about a Lisp programmer at NASA.

You already know about Paul Graham. Have you read his online articles?

Prof Novak has done lots of work on physics and AI. Here is one example. He has some code examples somewhere which allow entering a physics problem in word form and then getting the answer.

https://www.cs.utexas.edu/~novak/tkde91.html
I could go on and on and on some more. Here is Lisp for quantum programming.



If you are studying the origins of Lisp it helps to understand something about Lambda Calculus. Here is a good introductory video on this topic.

By the way, Common Lisp also supports object-oriented programming.

 

[Klystron]

Thanks for the Lisp links @Aufbauwerk 2045. The JPL Lisp programmer article is moving.

I worked at NASA Ames Research Center as a contract software engineer for 11 years beginning in 1984, so had overlap with the author's 12 years at JPL. I knew smalltalk but did not learn Lisp until ~1990, and that on Next machines donated by Apple to my university. I remember NASA's "agent" architecture wave. Interesting concepts but I managed to limp along programming with functions and objects. I implemented concepts learned from Lisp but expressed in C dialects plus bits of FORTRAN and assembler without benefit of the cool interpreters described in the articles.

 

[Demystifier]

Grosso and Pastori Parravicini, Solid State Physics
In my opinion, one of the best written textbooks on the subject, much better than more famous Kittel or Aschroft and Mermin.

 

[Mark44]

If you want to try some Lisp programming, which I highly recommend, then consider CLISP which is easy to download and install. Or if you prefer a Windows GUI you may wish to try LispWorks. They have Personal and Hobbyist editions. I haven't used it but it looks interesting.

I looked into LispWorks, but it seemed a bit expensive. I've been using GNU CLISP, and it's satisfactory for what I'm using it for.

This is an interesting story about a Lisp programmer at NASA.

Very interesting. I had no idea that Lisp was used so much in those exploration vehicles.

You already know about Paul Graham. Have you read his online articles?

I'll definitely look into them. Besides the Graham book, I also have the book by Winston and Horn.

 

[Auto-Didact]

Random Walks, Critical Phenomena, and Triviality in Quantum Field Theory (1992) by Roberto Fernández, Jürg Fröhlich and Alan D. Sokal

 

[Demystifier]

- Shankar, Quantum Field Theory and Condensed Matter (2017)

Written much better than most other books on condensed matter QFT, which might be related to the fact that Shankar has also written textbooks on more elementary aspects of theoretical physics (Fundamentals of Physics, Fundamentals of Physics 2, Principles of Quantum Mechanics).

 

[Borg]

This is the textbook that will be used in my weekly ML study group. Lots to learn.

Bayesian Methods for Hackers: Probabilistic Programming and Bayesian Inference.

 

[Auto-Didact]

- Shankar, Quantum Field Theory and Condensed Matter (2017)

Written much better than most other books on condensed matter QFT, which might be related to the fact that Shankar has also written textbooks on more elementary aspects of theoretical physics (Fundamentals of Physics, Fundamentals of Physics 2, Principles of Quantum Mechanics).

Shankar is one of the few condensed matter theorists who actually started off in and then left QFT in order to do condensed matter, because condensed matter theory is from a pure and applied mathematics viewpoint a much more interesting object than QFT.

He also basically taught Witten advanced S-matrix theory from a very applied mathematics point of view, at least until Witten overtook him in skill within a week.

 

[atyy]

This is the textbook that will be used in my weekly ML study group. Lots to learn.

Bayesian Methods for Hackers: Probabilistic Programming and Bayesian Inference.

I browsed it and it seems pretty entertaining (the question about whether Steve is a librarian or a farmer).

 

[Jimster41]

“The Vital Question” Nick Lane.

 

[member 587159]

I'm currently reading Conway's book "Functions of one complex variable I". I like the "no-nonsense" style of the book. It gets to complex integration rather quickly (and the complex line integral is defined as a Riemann-Stieltjes integral), and that's where stuff gets interesting.

The next topic on my reading list is differential geometry. I'm thinking about reading Lee's Smooth Manifolds for that.

 

[Dr Transport]

When the boss says "Since your the only Theoretical Physicist we have on staff, we need you to look at something and figure out what is causing this huge effect". Well, that effect has to do with a plasma, so I guess I'll have to relearn all of my plasma physics, so what do I do, I pick up Principles of Plasma Electrodynamics (Springer Series in Electronics and Photonics) (Volume 9) by Andrej F. Alexandrov. It's hard, but if you spend a couple of weeks reading Introduction to Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion by Francis Chen, it all starts to make sense.

 

[Demystifier]

S. Carroll, Something Deeply Hidden: Quantum Worlds and the Emergence of Spacetime
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1524743011/?tag=pfamazon01-20

This new book is one of the best popularizations of the field of quantum foundations, especially if you want to understand why exactly some serious physicists believe in many worlds.

 

[CJ2116]

S. Carroll, Something Deeply Hidden: Quantum Worlds and the Emergence of Spacetime
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1524743011/?tag=pfamazon01-20

This new book is one of the best popularizations of the field of quantum foundations, especially if you want to understand why exactly some serious physicists believe in many worlds.

I don't know if it's just because I'm getting older and grumpier, but I'm really having a hard time reading popular physics books these days. I bought a copy of Briane Greene's The Hidden Reality last month and struggled through the first 100 pages because the amount of metaphors totally unrelated to the physics he was discussing ruined it for me. One sentence of actual physics followed by two pages of filler.

 

[weirdoguy]

but I'm really having a hard time reading popular physics books these days.

I have had this problem since I started the 3rd year of physics (in Poland master studies takes 5 years) when more advanced lectures came in. Besides, I am a HUGE purist when it comes to physics and writing about physics and I am very critical about everything I read. Reading most of the pop-sci things just hurts. I got last Hawking's book for christmas and I stopped reading it after first chapter But I have to force myself to finish it because I want to write an overview for my blog...

Anyways, to stay on topic, right now I'm reading The Character of Physical Law by Feynman and Mathematical Methods for Physics and Engineering by our Orodruin. Finishing 5th chapter, and it's nice by now. The only issue I have is that I learned differential geometry so early in my education that it's really disturbing to see two repeated indices on the same level

 

[DarMM]

I used to love pop science when I was younger. It's sort of sad now seeing all the cool books coming out or walking past the "Science" section in a book store but knowing I'll get nothing from them.

 

[Klystron]

In a year I enjoy reading four to five books on the history of mathematics. I may have posted earlier in this thread on an excellent book describing the history and solution of "Fermat's Last Theorem" that included details about the short life of mathematician Evariste Galois almost as if the reader were present at his demise.

Therefor, I am intrigued halfway through Keith Devlin's book "The Man of Numbers -- Fibonacci's Arithmetic Revolution" at the conclusion of chapter four the author says, "...this is what we know of Leonardo Pisano's life.". Despite new (2004) translations and transcriptions of Leonardo's books and new scholarly references to missing publications, Devlin refuses to speculate or dramatize beyond what has been historically verified. There are broad hints that Leonardo and his father 'knew Arabic' perhaps a veiled reference to Ashkenazi family ties but the author goes no further than their documented educational and mercantile ties in medieval North Africa.

I recommend this short history to all fans of filus Bonnaci and his numbers.

 

[Auto-Didact]

The Essence of Turbulence as a Physical Phenomenon, A Tsinober 2019.

Just started, so far its a wonderful book. I have read some of Tsinober's papers in the past when studying the Navier-Stokes equation. He writes with a clarity and down-to-earthness which many instrumentalist-types physicists could probably learn a thing or two from.