1
$\begingroup$

This question already has an answer here:

This question is a little different from other questions referring to books on QM.
I ask you to tell me some books that have QM on a simpler level than that of a full course on QM. Some universities advice students to buy a book that has generally most of undergraduate material but on a simple level (like Young's or Serways' books University physics). They cover modern physics on a simpler level and help students on the courses "fundamentals of physics". After that semester,students take courses on each subject and delve into them in a more deep manner with more advanced textbooks. I am not asking you to tell me the advanced books (like Griffith's or Dirac's books on QM) but tell me about some simpler books that have QM (and Special relativity if possible).
I ask this because some friends of mine advised me to tackle QM on a more simple manner with simpler mathematics to get the grips on the intuition behind it first, and then go to the full understanding with more advanced textbooks.

$\endgroup$

Before answering, please see our policy on resource recommendation questions. Please write substantial answers that detail the style, content, and prerequisites of the book, paper or other resource. Explain the nature of the resource so that readers can decide which one is best suited for them rather than relying on the opinions of others. Answers containing only a reference to a book or paper will be removed!

marked as duplicate by Qmechanic Mar 29 '15 at 22:12

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • $\begingroup$ Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/33215/2451 $\endgroup$ – Qmechanic Mar 29 '15 at 22:04
  • $\begingroup$ That link is for a question for inductory QM for a QM course.I am asking for a more general book that covers QM(not exclusively) but on a simpler level for a first year course in general physics(at most universities called "fundamentals of physics").I think this should not be a duplicate $\endgroup$ – TheQuantumMan Mar 29 '15 at 22:25
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Hi Landos Adam. Resource recommendation and reference questions are restricted on Phys.SE for various reasons, e.g., they tend to be list questions and primarily opinion-based. I'm closing this question as a duplicate, not because it is an exact duplicate, but to point you in the right direction. $\endgroup$ – Qmechanic Mar 29 '15 at 22:35
0
$\begingroup$

I don't think you can get much better than the physical books Susskind and Hrabovsky's "The Theoretical Minimum". If the words "hamiltonian" and "lagrangian" sound scary to you, then you should pick up both the book "What you need to know to start doing physics" and the book "Quantum Mechanics: The Theoretical Minimum".

The math isn't dumbed down, but is explained in total honesty and gives only the most fundamental results needed (Hence, "the theoretical minimum"). It's much more minimal than, say, Griffith's textbook, but it still covers the essentials honestly!

Anything simpler and I think you would no longer be doing physics! You'd be in the realm of popular science.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Susskind's book is too simple i think.It just covers the intuition but the mathematics behind it are VERY minimal,to the point that it is not academic physics.I want academic physics but at a first year level(courses on fundamentals of physics cover QM in few lectures but give you the mathematical and intuitive meaning before the full course).Haven't you got something just a bit more advanced? $\endgroup$ – TheQuantumMan Mar 29 '15 at 22:22
  • $\begingroup$ @LandosAdam I haven't gone through his Quantum Mechanics book in much detail, but I know for sure his mechanics book is absolutely academic physics (from after the principle of least action). If you go to a bookstore, pick up the QM book, and can prove almost every major result in his book, then you're right: don't get it. Otherwise, you might be too critical. $\endgroup$ – user12029 Mar 29 '15 at 22:49
  • $\begingroup$ @LandosAdam it's possible I haven't read his quantum mechanics book closely enough and that it's much worse than his mechanics book, I'll take another look over it tomorrow at a library. $\endgroup$ – user12029 Mar 29 '15 at 22:51
  • $\begingroup$ i have downloaded his book.I need something with just a bit more mathematics in it!thank you! $\endgroup$ – TheQuantumMan Mar 29 '15 at 23:03
  • $\begingroup$ @LandosAdam -- if you want more math then the Susskind book (which I think is a good book despite its minimal mathematical examples) then you need to go straight to the book "Principles of Quantum Mechanics" by Shankar. This is mentioned in the duplicate question post linked to your question. I highly recommend it. If it is too much math then do Susskind first. $\endgroup$ – K7PEH Mar 30 '15 at 0:16

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.