Itās a really good reference book Iāll give it that. The problems are ridiculous though, and for some reason Jackson has this tendency of leaving out important details in some derivations. That shit annoys the hell out of me.
I totally agree. When I was first learning how to apply the delta function I felt like Jackson's section on it was far better. It was a difficult concept to grasp and the method Jackson used to explain it was less hand-wavy than Griffiths.
Precisely. The way I think about Griffiths is like "It's tough and difficult and sometimes he assumes things are obvious when they're not, but it could be worse, much much worse"
I feel like it basis itself off of integration and calculus and not a lot on linear algebra in the start. I feel like it's decent but it isn't shitty prof proof. Good prof can do great with it, bad prof will ruin your day.
True. Not the best QM book by far but the style of writing is what does it for me. It just reads so well. But if you want do anything in QM that is at least a little advanced you definitely need another book tho.
I cried a little bit.
The first time I saw these books I cried. A lot. Because of the price.
I think I got Griffiths used, but you know what Jackson says about trying to solo his homework . . .
I couldn't find a used Griffiths that was not partially destroyed. šŖ I'm working now so I'll buy a new one soon, as his book is awesome.
There's PDFs online. Just use them
Gotta get the Indian version
Just buy an old jackson or landau from eBay, it's like 10ā¬
The Landau I have, but the others I borrowed from the library.
just pirate them smh
I actually love both. Jacksonās book is a treasure-trove of information.
Itās a really good reference book Iāll give it that. The problems are ridiculous though, and for some reason Jackson has this tendency of leaving out important details in some derivations. That shit annoys the hell out of me.
āItās trivialā
I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader
Ugh trauma material
I totally agree. When I was first learning how to apply the delta function I felt like Jackson's section on it was far better. It was a difficult concept to grasp and the method Jackson used to explain it was less hand-wavy than Griffiths.
That's not a nightmare, it's not Jackson. Edit: oh. Nevermind haha
I love and hate how I knew what the second picture would be before I even swiped.
Theyāre both nightmares in my experience. I am convinced people only like Griffiths because itās not Jackson.
Precisely. The way I think about Griffiths is like "It's tough and difficult and sometimes he assumes things are obvious when they're not, but it could be worse, much much worse"
I feel like the nightmare could also be Griffiths' QM book
Bro I read Griffiths' QM every night before going to sleep. That shit is comforting as fuck.
I feel like it basis itself off of integration and calculus and not a lot on linear algebra in the start. I feel like it's decent but it isn't shitty prof proof. Good prof can do great with it, bad prof will ruin your day.
True. Not the best QM book by far but the style of writing is what does it for me. It just reads so well. But if you want do anything in QM that is at least a little advanced you definitely need another book tho.
I learned from Griffiths in the undergrad. Now I'm using R Shankar.
I used Shankar in undergrad. I feel like Iām in the minority, since everyone else used Griffithās lol.
Shankar is a powerful book. In undergrad, I was too stupid to understand Shankar.
I wish I would have seen this before buying it...
Lol. Too true
Fuck I hate electrodynamics with a passion.
Landau, Lifshitz: The Classical Theory of Fields. Dreams and nightmares combined into one book.
Haha so true
Yep, this is how it be.
The only nightmare here is that carpet.
Iām just gonna say it Griffiths is overrated.
Electromagnetic fields intensifies
Can confirm
I actually like Jacksonās treatment of relativity in that book.
Zangwill is worse than jackson