What classes are needed for a rigorous understanding of quantum mechanics?

blindconsole
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I want to relearn QM within a rigorous mathematical framework. What classes should I take? Off the top of my head, I expect that I'll need to know functional analysis and group theory. What else?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Kukurio said:
I want to relearn QM within a rigorous mathematical framework. What classes should I take? Off the top of my head, I expect that I'll need to know functional analysis and group theory. What else?

I bought a book recently from Chapters, "The Mathematical Principles of Quantum Mechanics by Derek F. Lawden" for only 30$. I believe it is exactly what you are looking for. It is the size of a small novel and it will build up the mathematical principles of quantum mechanics from the ground up. It even has some stuff at the end of the book on relativistic quantum mechanics.
 
As to what classes you should take, certainly Linear Algebra would be necessary. Probability, surely.

Since you are talking about taking classes, I assume you are in a college now. Talk to people in the Physics department!
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top