Other What are you reading now? (STEM only)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Demystifier
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Reading
AI Thread Summary
Current reading among participants focuses on various STEM books, including D. J. Tritton's "Physical Fluid Dynamics," which is appreciated for its structured approach to complex topics. J. MacCormick's "Nine Algorithms That Changed the Future" is noted for its accessibility in explaining computer algorithms. Others are exploring advanced texts like S. Weinberg's "Gravitation and Cosmologie" and Zee's "Gravitation," with mixed experiences regarding their difficulty. Additionally, books on machine learning, quantum mechanics, and mathematical foundations are being discussed, highlighting a diverse range of interests in the STEM field. Overall, the thread reflects a commitment to deepening understanding in science and mathematics through varied literature.
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #402
That's a very good book. I know the German edition from 2 years ago.
 
  • Like
Likes dextercioby, atyy and Demystifier
  • #403
Finished
41vKAbW7rLL.jpg


and onto the sequel

51t3WFKt4dL._SY346_.jpg
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes pinball1970, Klystron, atyy and 3 others
  • #404
great science writing in the books above, the analysis detailed and quantitative. Rather than tell the typical gee-whiz popular science story, McGhee lays out clearly what are observed facts and then details range of explanations currently under debate without having an obvious axe to grind. The first book details the rise of plants and land animals, which as the title suggests, had to start over after the End-Frasnian extinction event, which the book describes as likely caused an anoxyic ocean triggered by runoff of phosphates from weathering of newly created mountain ranges. Only downside is a fair amount of jargon that I had to Google to follow
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970, AndreasC, atyy and 2 others
  • #405
vanhees71 said:
That's a very good book. I know the German edition from 2 years ago.
Unfortunately the first author, D. Durr, passed away a couple of days ago, due to Covid-19.
 
  • Sad
Likes Marc Rindermann, AndreasC, atyy and 2 others
  • #406
I finally started with Zee's third book, about group theory. And again, for me it's the best book on the subject. It's one of those books which gives a clear intuition on the subject, filled with historical anecdotes and nice insights, instead of the dry "theorem-proof" ad infinitum. Highly recommended.
 
  • Sad
  • Like
  • Skeptical
Likes dextercioby, vanhees71, Demystifier and 1 other person
  • #407
Eric Mazur's Principles and Practices. It's terrible; don't buy it.
 
  • Haha
Likes Demystifier
  • #408
Quantum Mechanics: The Theoretical Minimum.
Screen Shot 2021-02-15 at 12.36.01 PM.png

A Mathmatician's Apology
Screen Shot 2021-02-15 at 12.35.36 PM.png
 
  • Like
Likes atyy, pinball1970, vanhees71 and 2 others
  • #409
Vibrating Strings by D R Bland, 95 pages (1960)

I found it in a used book store. It is an introduction to the wave equation using transverse motion on a string that is suitable for a lower level undergraduate. It is a pleasant evening’s read for someone more advanced. It includes a section on air resistance and external forces that I had not seen before.
 
Last edited:
  • #410
haushofer said:
Highly recommended.

It's funny how differently one book can perceived by different people. For me this book was a nightmare o0)
 
  • Like
Likes dextercioby
  • #411
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Demystifier and vanhees71
  • #413
EDIT. the image is small
Introduction to Quantum Mechanics
Second addition
David J. GriffithsThere are problems at the end of each chapter so I can test myself.
I have read some of this before but must have bailed at some point, probably when I moved. (or it got too hard)
 

Attachments

  • QM.jpg
    QM.jpg
    6.8 KB · Views: 151
  • Like
Likes Hamiltonian and AndreasC
  • #414
pinball1970 said:
EDIT. the image is small
Introduction to Quantum Mechanics
Second addition
David J. Griffiths

Does this have a picture of a cat climbing a ladder?
 
  • #415
atyy said:
Does this have a picture of a cat climbing a ladder?
Or a cat dead from falling off a ladder. You cannot properly motivate QM without a dead cat.
 
  • Haha
Likes atyy and Demystifier
  • #416
atyy said:
Does this have a picture of a cat climbing a ladder?

This only in Green

1616401722288.png
 
  • Like
Likes Hamiltonian
  • #417
  • Love
  • Haha
Likes Demystifier and vanhees71
  • #418
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes Demystifier and vanhees71
  • #419
atyy said:
http://astro.dur.ac.uk/~done/qm2/catladder.jpg

Hmmm, the ladder is important, maybe you'll find it inside the book (around the operator treatment of the harmonic oscillator)?
@atyy

Why is this important?
Schrodinger’s cat, ladder, harmonic oscillator?
If this is so hard it requires diagrams to illustrate points then I am probably not going to able to follow it.
If it’s a physics joke then I don’t get it.
 
  • #420
pinball1970 said:
@atyy

Why is this important?
Schrodinger’s cat, ladder, harmonic oscillator?
If this is so hard it requires diagrams to illustrate points then I am probably not going to able to follow it.
If it’s a physics joke then I don’t get it.

It‘s a joke. There are these important things called ladder operators, so of course physicists want Schrodinger’s cat to be climbing a ladder. Physicists are simple folk.
 
  • Like
Likes atyy, Demystifier and vanhees71
  • #421
caz said:
It‘s a joke. There are these important things called ladder operators, so of course physicists want Schrodinger’s cat to be climbing a ladder. Physicists are simple folk.
Simple? Yeah ok.
When I understand enough of the physics to understand all the jokes then I have probably made progress.
I am still at the, “A neutron walked into a bar,” stage.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes atyy, AndreasC, Demystifier and 1 other person
  • #422
pinball1970 said:
“A neutron walked into a bar,”
What did the bartender charge him for a drink?
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes etotheipi, atyy, pinball1970 and 1 other person
  • #424
I noticed Springer had a 50% "yellow sale" so I splashed down a bunch of money (more than I should have perhaps) so now I'm going to be busy for a while. I bought:
  • Quantum Theory for Mathematicians by Brian Hall
  • 2 volumes on probability by Shiryaev
  • Smooth Manifolds and Riemannian manifolds by John Lee
  • Lang's Algebra. This wasn't on sale but I wanted to buy it because I like very thick reference books you can hit people with
But whatever, what else am I going to use the money for? Thanks to Covid I have become a hermit...
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and martinbn
  • #426
Lechner's electrodynamics is really "modern" in the sense that it presents electrodynamics as it should be presented after 1905 as a relativistic field theory (of course on the graduate level only). It's not just the xth reproduction of Jackson's inductive approach, which anyway cannot be topped so easily by rewriting it ;-).
 
  • Like
Likes dextercioby, AndreasC and Demystifier
  • #427
AndreasC said:
What do you mean exactly?
Level of rigor, depth of thinking, foundations to applications ratio, ...
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and AndreasC
  • #428
vanhees71 said:
Lechner's electrodynamics is really "modern" in the sense that it presents electrodynamics as it should be presented after 1905 as a relativistic field theory (of course on the graduate level only). It's not just the xth reproduction of Jackson's inductive approach, which anyway cannot be topped so easily by rewriting it ;-).
Thanks. Also what do you mean by "inductive approach"?
 
  • #429
Demystifier said:
Level of rigor, depth of thinking, foundations to applications ratio, ...
By the way, what do you think of Zangwill's book?
 
  • #430
AndreasC said:
Thanks. Also what do you mean by "inductive approach"?
It's going the old-fashioned way by starting with electrostatics going through magnetostatics, quasistatics, and only finally to the full Maxwell equations. The deductive approach (though as old as Hertz's famous monograph) is more modern. You just start with the Maxwell equations in vacuum (of course in differential form ;-)) as the fundamental theory. That's honest in the sense that it's just the elementary formulation of everything having to do with electromagnetic phenomena (on the classical level). It cannot be logically derived from anything more fundamental. The "derivations" of the inductive approach leading in steps from electrostatics to the full Maxwell equations are heuristic (though important for an intuitive understanding).
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes dextercioby and AndreasC
  • #431
AndreasC said:
By the way, what do you think of Zangwill's book?
I didn't read it in depth, but superficially it looks to me like a new edition of Jackson.
 
  • #432
Demystifier said:
I didn't read it in depth, but superficially it looks to me like a new edition of Jackson.
Personally I like it but it's a bit too much information for learning perhaps. Iirc it is 950+ pages. It goes pretty in depth however and it has these boxes which mention interesting phenomena or historical facts etc. Kind of unusual for a book at this level. I'm not sure I would say it is like a newer Jackson, Jackson did things in a rather different order. Jackson started from potentials and went into boundary value problem solving pretty much. Zangwill starts from the Maxwell equations.
 
  • #433
AndreasC said:
Iirc it is 950+ pages. It goes pretty in depth however and it has these boxes which mention interesting phenomena or historical facts etc.
Sounds like MTW!
 
  • Like
Likes Demystifier
  • #434
romsofia said:
Sounds like MTW!
It does, kind of. But it's actually more condensed than MTW.
 
  • #435
My package arrived, whoooo!
IMG_20210429_232429.jpg
 
  • Like
  • Love
  • Wow
Likes Hamiltonian, Kolmo, Mondayman and 6 others
  • #436
  • Love
  • Haha
Likes AndreasC and weirdoguy
  • #437
  • #438
AndreasC said:
My package arrived, whoooo!
I have three of the books in the image, as well as three more that aren't in the image, but that were written by authors in the image.
 
  • #439
George Jones said:
I have three of the books in the image, as well as three more that aren't in the image, but that were written by authors in the image.
Which ones? I am guessing one of them is quantum theory and you also have Lie algebras by Brian Hall.
 
  • #440
AndreasC said:
Which ones? I am guessing one of them is quantum theory and you also have Lie algebras by Brian Hall.
Yes. I also have "Calculus of Several Variables" by Lang and "Introduction to Topological Manifolds" by Lee.
 
  • Like
Likes atyy and AndreasC
  • #441
andresB said:
That talk in the preface about massless charged particles is intriguing.
Sounds interesting. I guess it's something for masochists ;-)).
 
  • #443
After giving up Frankel's books, I'm reading Marian Fecko "Differential geometry and Lie groups for physicists". I have mixed feelings.
 
  • #444

Physical Chemistry - Quanta, Matter, and Change 2ed​

And no, it's not voluntary.
 
  • Haha
Likes Demystifier
  • #445
vanhees71 said:
Sounds interesting. I guess it's something for masochists ;-)).
Aren't we all masochists? :oldbiggrin:
 
  • #446
MathematicalPhysicist said:
Aren't we all masochists? :oldbiggrin:
No, the guy in #444 is a victim of a sadist. :oldbiggrin:
 
  • #447
Demystifier said:
No, the guy in #444 is a victim of a sadist. :oldbiggrin:
So you don't like chemistry?
 
  • #448
MathematicalPhysicist said:
So you don't like chemistry?
Who do you ask, me or the guy in #444? It was him who said that he doesn't read it voluntarily. If you ask me, I like physical chemistry, but not the rest of chemistry.
 
  • #449
Demystifier said:
Who do you ask, me or the guy in #444? It was him who said that he doesn't read it voluntarily. If you ask me, I like physical chemistry, but not the rest of chemistry.
Always use inclusive- or when talking to me... :oldbiggrin:
 
  • #450
Demystifier said:
What book are you reading now, or have been reading recently? Only STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) books are counted.
I'm currently reading Introduction to Nanoscience by Hornyak, Dutta, Tibbals and Rao, as well as Introduction to Nanotechnology by Poole and Owens. I'm doing a course on nanosci and though it seemed a bit out of my interests in the beginning, I'm actually pretty interested now!
 
  • Like
Likes BillTre and vanhees71

Similar threads

Back
Top