(Part 3) Top products from r/quantum
We found 15 product mentions on r/quantum. We ranked the 55 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the products ranked 41-60. You can also go back to the previous section.
41. Quantum: Einstein, Bohr, and the Great Debate about the Nature of Reality
Sentiment score: 1
Number of reviews: 1
42. The Theory of Almost Everything: The Standard Model, the Unsung Triumph of Modern Physics
Sentiment score: 0
Number of reviews: 1
43. The Structure and Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics
Sentiment score: 0
Number of reviews: 1
Used Book in Good Condition
44. Quantum Mechanics: The Theoretical Minimum
Sentiment score: 1
Number of reviews: 1
Basic Books AZ
45. The Theoretical Minimum: What You Need to Know to Start Doing Physics
Sentiment score: 1
Number of reviews: 1
Basic Books AZ
46. Quantum Mechanics for Electrical Engineers
Sentiment score: 1
Number of reviews: 1
47. Mathematical Methods in the Physical Sciences
Sentiment score: 0
Number of reviews: 1
48. The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics: The Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics in Historical Perspective
Sentiment score: 0
Number of reviews: 1
50. Theoretical Physics (Dover Books on Physics)
Sentiment score: 1
Number of reviews: 1
51. Quantum Computing Since Democritus
Sentiment score: 0
Number of reviews: 1
Used Book in Good Condition
52. Quantum Mechanics and the Particles of Nature: An Outline for Mathematicians
Sentiment score: 0
Number of reviews: 1
Used Book in Good Condition
Friend asked for a similar list a while ago and I put this together. Would love to see people thoughts/feedback.
Very High Level Introductions:
Deeper Pop-sci Dives (probably in this order):
Blending the line between pop-sci and mathematical (these books are not meant to be read and put away but instead read, re-read and pondered):
Quantum: Einstein, Bohr, and the Great Debate About the Nature of Reality
HUGE fan of this one. What it offers instead of many other books is it takes a historical approach to the story, which to me makes the subject significantly more interesting. He starts at Planck, describing his whole life by piecing together historical information, and does the same with every other physicist mentioned. With time, you have a full picture of each character and their life of debating each other on these topics. I really loved how he'd give a very full description of how a discovery happened, for example Heisenberg taking a very late night walk when he thought of the idea of the Uncertainty Principal. Kumar manages to keep the lead-up to each breakthrough very suspenseful by describing the state of physics at the time and the pressure each physicist was under. Later, after the famous debates we are presented with World War II and how each of the major players lived their lives throughout the war (Heisenberg worked on atomic weapon research for the axis, while Bohr was shipped to America to work on the Manhattan Project, and before the war they were both best friends). In the end you'll have a deep historical knowledge of these physicists, while having a good beginner understanding of the theories. I'm not a big reader, but I found myself glued to the book, extremely interested in what will happen next.
I remember getting a few good laughs in as well, while reading it.
For example, during the Solvay convention Einstein temporarily outsmarted Bohr with a surprise thought experiment, and in this picture we can really see the personality of each of them. (Look at Einstein's smug face)
For a good popular overview that has a strong historical focus, this is great: Quantum
Personally, and I think most philosophers of quantum physics, think Krauss is a bit of a hack when it comes to exploring the conceptual and foundational elements of quantum physics. See this: Krauss review
Albert actually has a really good introduction book to quantum mechanics that focuses on the more conceptual side of things, aimed at those with little background in physics: Quantum Mechanics and Experience
When I was in high school, I learned from Georg Joos' Theoretical Physics. While it is a little dated (1934), it gives you a solid introduction to classical and quantum physics.
Also, you need to learn mathematics. Lots of it. It would be impossible to seriously explore physics until you have at least have a thorough understanding of multivariate calculus and linear algebra. If you only know bits of high school calculus, but are strong in geometry, I highly recommend Maxwell's Matter and Motion and An Elementary Treatise of Electricity.
If you've got some EE experience, then Quantum Mechanics for Electrical Engineers might be for you. With your background, I'd approach QM from a signal processing point of view: a free particle will have energy eigenstates that are sine waves.
A good reference book is Mathematical Methods in the Physical Sciences by Mary Boas
Amazon link
Though a bit outdated, Jammer is a good place to start:
http://www.amazon.com/Philosophy-Quantum-Mechanics-Interpretations-Perspective/dp/0471439584
This recent arxiv article classifies various interpretations -- to learn more about each interpretation follow the citation trail:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1509.04711.pdf
Yes, I read it before telling people what it was.
No, I don't want your reading list. I already have quantum computing since democritus to finish, quantum computing and information to re-read, and quantum machine learning to buy.
Who doesn't wonder about being wrong every day?
I'd check this book out: http://www.amazon.com/The-Theory-Almost-Everything-Standard/dp/0452287863/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1341501920&sr=8-1&keywords=the+theory+of+almost+everything
The Standard Model was just yesterday proven even more correct with the discovery of the Higgs boson. This book is a simple intro to a lot of quantum concepts.
> for the layman mathematician
Just read this book. Quantum mechanics can't be properly explained in a one-hour documentary.
I started reading books when I was ~12, I think this is the book I used to get introduced: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Quantum-Theory-Cannot-Hurt-You/dp/0571235468
J. R. Gott
You might want to consider whether you really want to insinuate an equivalence between science and theology, and whether you want to put the word expertise in quotes. If you think that you're equipped to point out glaring logical holes in quantum mechanics, well, there isn't exactly an equivalent to the Bible in physics (it'd contradict the scientific enterprise to have one), but there are a few standard textbooks on quantum mechanics you can choose from.
Shankar's Principles of Quantum Mechanics
Cohen-Tannoudji et al., Quantum Mechanics
Sakurai and Napolitano, Modern Quantum Mechanics
Landau and Lifshitz, Quantum Mechanics
I recommend Shankar of the four, but you can pick any you want. Unfortunately, textbooks are a bit pricey, but I'm sure your local university's library has a copy you could borrow. Try reading through one of them and picking out any glaring logical holes you can find.
It wouldn't be fair to try to look for logical holes in pop-sci articles you find on the internet instead. These are notorious for being wildly inaccurate. They say outlandish things because that's what gets clicks.
And I'll leave you with one last thought. (I'm not going to continue this conversation further afterwards.) The meaning of the world "realism" is context-dependent. Do you believe numbers are real, that they exist independently of human thought? Then you're a realist about numbers. If not, then you're a non-realist. Do you believe colors, sounds, tastes, etc., exist in objects themselves, or do you think they're merely in our heads? (Or perhaps that they're properties of our interactions with things, rather than inherent properties of things?) You might be a realist or non-realist about sensory properties.
When talking about quantum mechanics, non-realism or anti-realism refers to denying the reality of two things specifically: hidden variables, and the wave function. Non-realists still believe their measurements are real, that the experiments they do are real, that the objects they study are real, that the world they live in is real, and so on. But they believe that position, momentum, energy, etc., are properties of measurement events rather than of microscopic objects. And they believe that wave functions are artificial constructions for keeping track of information, rather than something out there in the world. They don't believe that there is no reality at all.
Realists by contrast believe in either the reality of the wave function, or of hidden variables. (Actually, realists kind of have to believe in the reality of the wave function now, thanks to recent ontology theorems.)
You're quite adamantly opposed to the position that no objective reality exists at all, but you're arguing against a position no-one actually holds. This kind of thing is exactly why I say you need to take a step back and consider whether you actually grasp the beliefs you're claiming to argue against.