What next?

[Manstein]

I appologise for my poor English, it is not my first language, and also for posting this here, i wasn't sure where to do so.

I'm 15 years old and I love physics so I learned calculus 1, calculus 2 and classical mechanics by myself and I am now learning electricity and magnetism. I do it as a hobbie, for fun, and I want to be a theoreticall physicist one day (being paid to have fun ).

 

I want to learn relativity and quantum mechanics. So my question is, after i finish with Electricity and Magnetism what order of subjects should I follow untill I reach quantum mechanics? What other physics should I learn before this two topics?

Thank you all and again, I'm sorry for posting this here.

 

[studiot]

Hello, Manstein and welcome.

 

All of the different branches of Physics support each other.

 

And all are supported by (applied) Mathematics.

 

So there is no one perfect order to learn.

 

What you have to do is learn some of each branch.

And then go back and learn some more for each branch.

 

You will find that results learned in one branch appear again in others.

 

Most physics comes back to mechanics and most branches are developed from mechanics.

 

For example force, work and energy are defined in mechanics.

Then they are used to define amperes in electricity.

 

Other mechanics properties are used to introduce quantum mechanics and particle physics.

 

So learn a little bit of everything, but a lot of mechanics.

 

Then learn some more of everything.

 

Remember you can stop almost anywhere in each branch and come back later.

 

Go well in your future studies.

 

[Manstein]

Thanks for the answer.

But don't some branches need other branches (not mechanics) to be understood?

Then it would be better to learn some branches first.

[studiot]

When I was your age, after mechanics we divided physics into four.

 

Heat, Light, Sound, Electricity & Magnetism.

 

Nowadays we would add Particle Physics and Quantum Theory.

 

Again, after mechanics these could be studied in any order.

[MigL]

Holy c*ap you're old studiot !!

You must be 100 yrs old if you studied physics before the discovery of sub-atomic particles and the development of QM.

Just kidding !

[studiot]

Do I look old?

I don't feel old.

I don't feel anything till noon.

Then it's time for my nap.

 

[Manstein]

When I was your age, after mechanics we divided physics into four.

 

Heat, Light, Sound, Electricity & Magnetism.

 

Nowadays we would add Particle Physics and Quantum Theory.

 

Again, after mechanics these could be studied in any order.

Ok, thanks. But isn't electromagnetism required to study quantum mechanics? I assumed quantum mechanics is based on some electromagnetism equations...

[ajb]

But isn't electromagnetism required to study quantum mechanics?

Basic knowledge would be needed, but you would not need Maxwell's equations.

 

 

I assumed quantum mechanics is based on some electromagnetism equations...

No, not unless you want to quantise the electromagnetic field, but that is quantum field theory rather than the standard non-relativistic quantum mechanics.

[Orodruin]

In hindsight I would think that learning the Lagrange and Hamilton formulations of classical mechanics would be most useful when learning quantum mechanics. Not because it is absolutely necessary, but rather because things might seem a bit less taken out of the blue. When it comes to mathematics, I would consider linear algebra to be an absolute necessity.

 

Unfortunately, being a theoretical physicist is not only having fun, even if there is lots of it (although this may just be the part of me that corrected 140 exams a week back talking ...). Overall, I would take it rather than a "normal" job any day.

[studiot]

 

Ok, thanks. But isn't electromagnetism required to study quantum mechanics? I assumed quantum mechanics is based on some electromagnetism equations...

 

 

No you don't need EM to start quantum mechanics.

 

I am sorry if I was not clear in post 2.

 

I am trying to say that you need to learn a little bit of one, then a lttle bit of another and then a little bit of another.

 

And then learn a little bit more of the first, the second, the third.....

 

And then learn a little bit more of the first, the second, the third.....

 

And then learn a little bit more of the first, the second, the third.....

 

Each time round the cycle you will get a bit further in physics.

 

But you need to make mechanics the first one.

Remember there are a lot of branches of mechanics - particle motion -force -energy-mass-wavemotion-and much more.

These play an important role in every other part of physics.

Edited May 4, 2014 by studiot

[ajb]

In hindsight I would think that learning the Lagrange and Hamilton formulations of classical mechanics would be most useful when learning quantum mechanics.

Indeed, a good grounding in Hamiltonian mechanics and a little symplectic geometry would have been useful before I was taught quantum mechanics as an undergraduate.

[Enthalpy]

I had a strong background on waves (electrical engineering and acoustics) before starting QM, it helped me a lot. Learn as much as you can there, including optics, acoustics, if possible radiowaves.

 

In maths, linear algebra and Fourier transforms - to begin with, as there is no limit... Hamiltonian: I saw it first with QM, and I too wish I had seen it at work in classical mechanics before.

 

Electromagnetism is important independently of QM, and interesting, so learn it anyway. It's difficult (more precisely, antennas are difficult, just like music intruments are the difficult part of acoustics) but less abstract than QM.

 

I strongly suggest that you learn through experiments kits in parallel with books or before. They are often very well made and give a different comprehension of science, one that is more useable than textbooks. They exist for electromagnetism and for optics at least.

 

About QM: many, many people tried to explain it using comparisons or images, but these ("surfer and wave at the same time", or the "wave or particle duality" dialectics...) only add complexity. Just go straight to the mathematical description.

[Manstein]

Thanks for all the answers, I will take them in account.

I had a strong background on waves (electrical engineering and acoustics) before starting QM, it helped me a lot. Learn as much as you can there, including optics, acoustics, if possible radiowaves.

 

In maths, linear algebra and Fourier transforms - to begin with, as there is no limit... Hamiltonian: I saw it first with QM, and I too wish I had seen it at work in classical mechanics before.

 

Electromagnetism is important independently of QM, and interesting, so learn it anyway. It's difficult (more precisely, antennas are difficult, just like music intruments are the difficult part of acoustics) but less abstract than QM.

 

I strongly suggest that you learn through experiments kits in parallel with books or before. They are often very well made and give a different comprehension of science, one that is more useable than textbooks. They exist for electromagnetism and for optics at least.

 

About QM: many, many people tried to explain it using comparisons or images, but these ("surfer and wave at the same time", or the "wave or particle duality" dialectics...) only add complexity. Just go straight to the mathematical description.

 

Just go straight to the mathematical description? I allways like to have an intuitive feeling and a real understanding of what is going on... Is that that hard in quantum mechanics?

[Delta1212]

Thanks for all the answers, I will take them in account.

 

Just go straight to the mathematical description? I allways like to have an intuitive feeling and a real understanding of what is going on... Is that that hard in quantum mechanics?

Depending on how you define "intuitive understanding," yes.

[studiot]

People are afraid of quantum mechanics because it is given some sort of mystic significance and the student is told "It is different"

 

It is not different at all.

 

Quantum mechancis simply picks out certain values as allowable and discards the rest. This arises quite naturally from normal continuous mathematics.

 

Consider the function f(X) : X² -1

 

X can vary from minus infinity to plus infinity. That is it can take on any value at all and the function is continuous. Whatever the value of X I can calculate the value of the function.

 

Now let me state

 

f(X) = 0 ie X²-1 =0, then there are only two values of X that satisfy these conditions.

 

So from a very simple continuous function I have moved to a quantised version.

[Mordred]

differential geometry is extremely handy for GR and SR, Calculus of course. Those two subjects are vital in any physics application.

 

this will indicate the need for strong math skills,

 

http://www.blau.itp.unibe.ch/newlecturesGR.pdf "Lecture Notes on General Relativity" Matthias Blau lol be warned its 928 pages long but covers GR and SR in excellent detail. Always handy in any physics reference collection

Edited May 9, 2014 by Mordred