Anyone studying Quantum Mechanics/Physics????
Ive lways been interested in this, and recently decided to find out more, I read a few books last month from Steven Hawkins, John Gribben, R.Feynmann etc, but most of these books are at least 5 years old.
What are the most recent books on this subject to bring me right up to date on developments, like 2000 onwards?
Are there any www links I might like to know about?
Thanks
What are the most recent books on this subject to bring me right up to date on developments, like 2000 onwards?
Are there any www links I might like to know about?
Thanks
Comments
This is not related to your other thread, and is simply a request for more information in a subject I am deeply interested in.
Thankyou for your co-operation.
Quantum physics is insane, and very, very thought prevoking, and after you get done with QP, try string theory, it makes your eyes pop :eek:
<strong>Google.
Quantum physics is insane, and very, very thought prevoking, and after you get done with QP, try string theory, it makes your eyes pop :eek: </strong><hr></blockquote>
Cheers, Ive done the Google thing, but I couldn't tell the tat from the whatever..Seemed like a million undergraduates making thier first web page about what I already know!
<strong>If I consumed so much bandwidth that I halted the ability for others to respond your thread I was not informed to that. If I halted traffic to your thread I will try to stay out of the way.
As to the content of my reply.. I think it does relate to the science fields you make reference to.. I admire science. However I also question certain pathological derivatives of certain branches of certain science when it has no proofs or empirical evidence.
I accept scientific law
I will consider as well as question various scientific theory..
Again if I stepped on your toes I am sorry.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You are quite welcome to post in any thread I propose, as is anyone of any religion/race/etc,
If you make a thread on religion, I will and many others will give you some religious flames, likewise If you make a thread about cow poo, I may if I think you are talking shyte give you some greif, but speaking for myself only, will only flame you based on that contribution and not on your views on religion from other threads.
Seems like a fair deal too me?
BTW, if you want to elaborate on your original post to this thread, (which appeared to me to be a bit of a sarcastic flame considering I just posted some flames too your religious thread) then feel free. Im always ready too listen, and I seem to remember I was one of the few people who gave Noah_j some respect during his 'preach' (did you catch that a few months ago?) while I listened to his arguments and made up my own mind. I even thanked him for having to balls to keep going with it. Then I flamed him! But If you're not prepared to listen to anything 'far-out' before dismissing it, you may just miss some vital 'truth' you were looking for. Im pretty sure anyone doing QP, has heard some pretty messed up ideas, I certainly have in the few books ive read, but I wont dismiss them until I have ammassed enough counter evidence to believe Im making a well educated decision, as far as religion/faith thing goes, Ive seen/heard enough to be as sure as I can be that it simply is nothing more than a man made fabrication, but if you want to add more to this, then sure, why not do it here? Ill never stop looking for the truth.
[ 07-02-2002: Message edited by: MarcUK ]</p>
<a href="http://www.research.ibm.com/quantuminfo/teleportation/index.html" target="_blank">From IBM</a>
<a href="http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/quantum/" target="_blank">Newscientist.com</a>
[ 07-02-2002: Message edited by: Zarathustra ]</p>
'Just Six Numbers' by Martin Rees, the Astronomer Royal, is great too. If you want to have the basic (impossible) forces that define the universe explained to you in a way that makes you go 'bloody hell' it's a damn fine place to start.
[ 07-02-2002: Message edited by: Hassan i-Sabbah ]</p>
mika.
Sorry though I can't recommend any book that feature the recent development of the theory of Quantum Mechanics. Since while I do have an interest in the basic of the theory of Quantum Mechanics, the details does kinda get fuzzy when one explore more to it.
<a href="http://www.innerx.net/personal/tsmith/1TSphysics.html" target="_blank">http://www.innerx.net/personal/tsmith/1TSphysics.html</a>
<strong>Here are some links you might find fun.
<a href="http://www.research.ibm.com/quantuminfo/teleportation/index.html" target="_blank">From IBM</a>
</strong><hr></blockquote>
We pay WAY too much for our HDs
Super string theory is the new thing. It's a theory that combines the gravitational force with the electro-weak and strong nuclear forces. Quantum mechanics describes the quantum world well enough and describes how the electro-magnetic, weak nuclear, and strong nuclear forces can be traced back in time to the Big Bang and how they are different manifestations of the same basic force. But QD doesn't describe how the 4rth weakest of them all force is connected. that's where SST (Superstring theory) comes in.
Unfortunately I get completely lost in the mathematics of it all, but as far as theories go, I seem to have gotten them all.
[quote]Originally posted by Zarathustra:
<strong>MarcUK... I too have an interest (same books) but unfortunatly I lack some understanding. Stephen Hawkins lost me two thirds through and I don't know what to make of 'In search of...' Were you convinced? Quantum seems too much to take in..like a fill-in theory that works until we find out what really (?) is going on.
[ 07-02-2002: Message edited by: Zarathustra ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
yeah, In search of Schrodingers cat was the second book I read, but it seems well out of date now, the follow-up, ...Kittens was much better, infact Id say the best one I've read (about 4 times now), perfectly explained all the QP scenarios and gives alot more details of experiments that have been done since "Cat" that really explain why some of the theories are really good/poor.
I particularly like the experiment where they watch atoms to see whether looking at things at the Quantum level changes things. (Simplified) They have a bowl of atoms, which they inject energy to (the electron shell). After a certain amount of time (say 1 second) when they look all the electrons have gained energy. However if they constantly watch the electrons, and keep adding the energy, the electrons never gain the energy, because in order to 'change states' you cannot have someone\\thing watching. Which means...well I won't spoil it, but it blows your mind.
Gravity really interests me, but there is not much talk of it anywhere, apart from the distortion of space time. Why Gravity? because if there are the 'graviton' particles they expect, they must be neutrally charged (my assumption) as particles with the same charge will repel. However, if they are neutrally chrged, then they wouldn't have any attraction power, so they cant be either!!!!Unless they are both positivley and negatively charged at the same time and attract when they are out of phase with each other if they also display particle-wave duality (my idea),
Don't laugh!, I admit I dont know shite, Im just looking for the answers.
[ 07-04-2002: Message edited by: MarcUK ]</p>
The Princeton Review: Cracking the AP Physics B&C Exams
Schaum's Outlines: College Physics
They're easy to understand and get you started with all the technical stuff. String theory? I think you need a grad school textbook for that. I'm too scared to touch anything that advanced right now.
BTW, has it occurred to you that perhaps the universe could have initially opened through diffusion? I'm looking into this right now...
Gravitons are neutrally charged because they do not rely on electomagnetic foce to cause the attraction. They're pure force bosons, like the strong force or the weak force. One hits you, you start moving toward the source. No pluses or minuses required.
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0130414085/qid=1025888590/sr=8-3/ref=sr_8_3/104-5227092-1123928" target="_blank">http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0130414085/qid=1025888590/sr=8-3/ref=sr_8_3/104-5227092-1123928</a>
In my opinion this is the best book written on calculus,I wish I had it a long time ago.A rigorous understanding of vector calculus is necessary for anyone seriously interested in physics or computer graphics,and differential forms are heavily used in advanced physics and can be applied to make graphics programs run very fast,they are well worth the effort in studying,and actually are not that difficult to master,they are just not widely taught.
Oh well, I've got plenty of time.