Anyone studying Quantum Mechanics/Physics????

in General Discussion edited January 2014
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?



  • Reply 1 of 26
    marcukmarcuk Posts: 4,442member
    Id appreciate it if we could keep the 'bashing' into the relative threads we post in. If your not giving a 'religious preaching' in any of the other threads we both post too, I will read and give you respect as I see fit too in relation to the topic at hand, as I did with Noah_J.

    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.
  • Reply 2 of 26
    crusadercrusader Posts: 1,129member

    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:
  • Reply 3 of 26
    soulcrushersoulcrusher Posts: 587member
    The confusion is due to the Measuring Problem... I think... and hope.
  • Reply 4 of 26
    marcukmarcuk Posts: 4,442member
    [quote]Originally posted by Crusader:


    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!
  • Reply 5 of 26
    marcukmarcuk Posts: 4,442member
    [quote]Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook:

    <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>
  • Reply 6 of 26
    ebbyebby Posts: 3,110member
    Here are some links you might find fun.

    <a href=""; target="_blank">From IBM</a>

    <a href=""; target="_blank"></a>

  • Reply 7 of 26
    zarathustrazarathustra Posts: 264member
    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 a fill-in theory that works until we find out what really (?) is going on.

    [ 07-02-2002: Message edited by: Zarathustra ]</p>
  • Reply 8 of 26
    rick1138rick1138 Posts: 938member
    A good book is Basic Concepts in Relativity and Early Quantum Theory by Robert Resnick and David Halliday is a good book,although the equations are in a somewhat toyish form. For the real math Schaum's Outline of Quantum Mechanicst and Quantum Mechanics by L.D. Landau are a good start.Also,go to <a href=""; target="_blank"></a> for some more references,string theory subsumes quantum mechanics,at least if any string theory is to be useful it must.Julian Brown's The Quest for the Quantum Computer is a good book on practical applications.
  • Reply 9 of 26
    Lee Smolin's 'The Life of the Cosmos' is excellent. He's one of the leading lights in quantum theory and he's written learned papers about unifying quantum theory, cosmology and relativity theory... here he suggests it might all be tied up with a kind of evolutionary theory too. If black holes and baby universes are your thing, and the 'ecology' of galaxies tickles your fancy, step this way. Really good fun, readable and way, way cool.

    '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>
  • Reply 10 of 26
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    <a href=""; target="_blank"></a>;

  • Reply 11 of 26
    rick1138rick1138 Posts: 938member
    Here's an excellent paper I've found,"Quantum Mechanics in One Hour",if you are comfortable with fairly advanced math.
  • Reply 12 of 26
    digixdigix Posts: 109member
    I think many of the average general population learned the basic about Quantum Mechanics / Physics from a Star Trek episode than from a book written by Stephen Hawkins and co. LOL!

    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.
  • Reply 13 of 26
    rick1138rick1138 Posts: 938member
    If you want a taste of the latest weird stuff going on in string theory check this out:

    <a href=""; target="_blank"></a>;
  • Reply 14 of 26
    andersanders Posts: 6,523member
    [quote]Originally posted by Ebby:

    <strong>Here are some links you might find fun.

    <a href=""; target="_blank">From IBM</a>


    We pay WAY too much for our HDs
  • Reply 15 of 26
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    I read The Elegant Universe, several books by Paul Davies, John Gribben, and a new book I am currently reading by Michio Kaku, but I forget the name because it's at home.

    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.
  • Reply 16 of 26
    marcukmarcuk Posts: 4,442member
    Thanks all, Ive bookmarked quite a few of those sites to sift through later.

    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 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>
  • Reply 17 of 26
    I'm one of two sophomores at my high school actually interested in this stuff. I'm familiar with all the concepts and recently taught myself basic calculus, but I'm starting from square one so that I can see everything in-depth. May I recommend:

    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...
  • Reply 18 of 26
    By the way, about gravity...

    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.
  • Reply 19 of 26
    rick1138rick1138 Posts: 938member
    At <a href=""; target="_blank"></a> there is a section that lists the areas of mathematics required for string theory,it's basically a pretty long list,it takes a few years of hard work to even begin to crack,but don't be intimidated,it just takes the desire to stick to it to pull it off.One book that I highly recommend that isn't mentioned there is John and Barbara Burke Hubbard's Vector Calculus,Linear Algebra and Differential Forms: a unified approach available here:

    <a href=""; target="_blank"></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.
  • Reply 20 of 26
    I understand vectors, and I understand calculus, but "vector calculus..." uh-oh. I skimmed this section of my math book.

    Oh well, I've got plenty of time.
Sign In or Register to comment.