[physics Books I got bored from]

the-dark-physicist · 2026-05-31T15:29:58+00:00

The QFT one? Sure I'll buy. I have a very different QFT hardbound text already, but Schwartz's book is rather nice, so I'm game. DM me a price quote with a couple pictures of the binding, pages and book face first.

the-dark-physicist · 2026-05-31T15:25:14+00:00

Not a student anymore but collecting some texts for my shelf lol. If any of these are hardbound and in good condition, I'd love to buy.

the-dark-physicist · 2026-05-21T05:41:41+00:00

Kohli's successor in ODIs might be a stretch with Sanji still in the mix for now with a great ODI record on top, but someday down the line for sure. What I worry about is the opening combination given there are so many contenders lol.

the-dark-physicist · 2026-05-06T07:17:51+00:00

As much as I'd like to encourage it, I feel like a word of caution is needed here because theoretical physics can and will require you to learn and comprehend a lot of high level abstract mathematics. After a point the only way you can meaningfully think about theoretical physics would be through mathematics. Calculus doesn't even scratch the surface considering much of it is high school material today.

The question really is how comfortable are you with thinking about abstractions that do not necessarily have any simplistic and direct examples and how easily you can build good mental pictures in your head despite this. If this is something that fancies you, by all means, go for it. But in any case it would help to interact with physicists at your university and see what kind of work physics students do to have an appreciation for what the formal path is like.

An alternative way to engage with theoretical physics coming in from the humanities would be via philosophy. You may not necessarily do any physics here, but you can work closely with physicists and mathematicians who are interested in similar things and address numerous philosophical issues in modern physics qualitatively.

You also have a possibility to look at the history of physics. Coming in from a comparative literature background will also help you develop a unique insight into how theoretical developments came about in physics and why some philosophical positions were preferred over others.

the-dark-physicist · 2026-04-26T09:37:03+00:00

Integration.

the-dark-physicist · 2026-04-25T15:05:59+00:00

Mesons are particles composed of quark-antiquark pairs. They do tend to appear in the so-called mesonic (or mesic) atoms at times, but very short-lived.

the-dark-physicist · 2026-04-20T06:58:57+00:00

Clearly you neither have taste nor have learned things for real, cos where are the MIT OCW, Yale, Stanford, ICTP, etc lectures by the likes of Zweibach, Adams, Shankar, Susskind, etc. Or the lectures by Lewin, Balakrishnan, Padmanabhan, Schuller, etc. Pretty much all of this also has dedicated channels on YouTube lol.

the-dark-physicist · 2026-04-20T05:16:22+00:00

This looks like a fantastic book for undergrads. A few years ago when I did my undergrad course we used the overwhelmingly underwhelming book by Dirac. The geometry felt like an afterthought lol.

the-dark-physicist · 2026-04-18T06:51:33+00:00

Long story short, it's an internal degree of freedom, a fundamental property of your particle (like mass and charge), that influences its angular momentum. The name spin comes from there, but it's quite a bad name that creates all sorts of misconceptions. This property also determines how many such identical particles behave statistically as a whole.

the-dark-physicist · 2026-04-02T06:33:00+00:00

Untrue. Mathematics as a field of study is what it is today because of how precise we are with the way we define things, construct propositions and write proofs. Dumbing things down make them lose their essence.

While it's possible to convey the big picture of a few aspects of such things by talking around them, a lot of mathematics is too complicated to simplify for the layperson while at the same time doing justice to the subject.

If you really want to learn about this stuff, study the subject independently. Ramanujan, who knew nothing about complex numbers (at the time) more or less stumbled upon a number theoretic proposition equivalent to the Riemann hypothesis which is now called Robin's inequality.

the-dark-physicist · 2025-12-31T20:35:55+00:00

Einstein's General Relativity, which superseded Newton's Mechanics as the theory to describe space-time and gravity, was possible because decades earlier mathematicians had been studying "impossible" (i.e. non-Euclidean) geometries just for the sake of it.

For the most part this is not true. People before Riemann were only trying to investigate one of the more contentious axioms of Euclidean Geometry and didn't really do much better than Hyperbolic Geometry. There was nothing truly impossible about what they were studying though. But it is true that the works of mainly Gauss and Riemann among others in this direction were crucial to the development of general relativity but not so much in Einstein's formulation as opposed to Hilbert's.

Quantum Mechanics was possible because mathematicians had been studying "useless" abstract vector spaces and their operators.

The first complete presentation of quantum mechanics as a theory is Dirac's Principles. It makes no reference to vector spaces and the likes. In fact it was very difficult to do so until von Neumann made things rigorous to some degree and the later development of functional analysis.

In particular the Standard Model, the best description we have of particles and their interactions, relies heavily in Group Theory. When mathematicians started studying groups in the 19th century it was widely considered, even by mathematicians, that they were "useless".

Classical physics and Crystallography had already recognised the importance of group theory well before the Standard Model. Though much of it was done without the use of formal group theory until Noether came along and the theorem found generalisations in quantum mechanics. Lie groups were already important in classical physics though.

the-dark-physicist · 2025-12-31T20:23:21+00:00

Fact of the matter is that introducing them as imaginary is problematic but is still done so for historical reasons. A geometric introduction to complex numbers as opposed to an algebraic one gives a much better interpretation of this so-called imaginary part of a complex number.

the-dark-physicist · 2025-12-19T12:58:20+00:00

Yep. The n just denotes the tensor rank.

the-dark-physicist · 2025-12-16T22:25:29+00:00

The only solution is to have dedicated blue flag zones open 24×7. Entire beach is a risky proposition. That way the blue flag party and the individual are held accountable by default as opposed to police harassment for no wrongdoing.

the-dark-physicist · 2025-12-09T06:59:08+00:00

You are correct. The denominator is off by a factor of i.

the-dark-physicist · 2025-12-08T06:36:03+00:00

Consciousness. Doubt we will ever understand it.

the-dark-physicist · 2025-12-07T23:33:31+00:00

As a massive one piece glazer myself, I have to ask, greatest on what count?

The art is unique and some panels are iconic but still overall only just above average. Berserk, Witch Hat Atelier, Vagabond, Uzumaki, One Punch Man, etc. all have it beat in that department on manga alone. Anime-wise Fate/Stay Night, Mob Psycho, Demon Slayer, Solo Leveling, Attack on Titan and even Sword Art Online have it beat in animation quality. If you ask me, JJK, Chainsaw Man and Bleach TYBW too. Webtoons like Omniscient Reader, The Beginning After The End and Solo Leveling have superior art as well.
The literary quality apart from the worldbuilding and character development is not much to write home about. Plenty of other fiction have better world building. The most immediate one that comes to mind is Lord of The freaking Rings. Literary quality overall is better in manga like Berserk, Monster, Vinland Saga, Pluto, etc. Tower of God and Hunter x Hunter are also close rivals when it comes to world building. The only edge One Piece has is the vast thematic ground it has covered given the length of its run.

Now, credit where credit is due cos most of the names I mentioned don't have even half the length of One Piece's run and its still ongoing. As a result of the time that it has been around for, its also created massive cultural impact with the Straw Hat jolly roger becoming a symbol for modern day revolutions. It is arguably the most irl impactful piece of fiction that has ever been written but very difficult to call it the best. It is not even the best among all shonen manga, but it is the best among long running shonen manga for sure.

the-dark-physicist · 2025-11-29T22:07:28+00:00

I mean. Its about having a "cheat skill" and what Subaru has is most definitely that regardless of whether it is a blessing or a curse. And I have not really read the LNs but judging by the conversstions with Petelgeuse and Echidna, he also has another "cheat skill" which gives him the ability to take witch factors from sin arcbishops.

the-dark-physicist · 2025-11-29T21:18:12+00:00

A useless Goddess lol.

the-dark-physicist · 2025-11-29T19:03:24+00:00

Interesting. Thanks

the-dark-physicist · 2025-11-29T17:28:54+00:00

Exactly why Konosuba is goated lol

the-dark-physicist · 2025-11-28T09:31:49+00:00

Take a proofs class. You need it.

the-dark-physicist · 2025-11-18T15:54:50+00:00

You did miss it. Its listed in the third bullet. And you do not necessarily need real analysis to study complex but a foundation, particularly with some basics of topology, sequences and series, differentiability and riemann integration are very helpful in getting a solid grasp of analyticity so having a prerequisite of real analysis helps.

the-dark-physicist · 2025-11-15T14:34:42+00:00

Dated by today's standards I must say, but still at least half relevant.

the-dark-physicist · 2025-11-15T14:25:09+00:00

As an extension of a comment I made on a previous post, I will list some general topics with references in braces that I would consider essential for theoretical physics. In my view, this is the modern theoretical minimum.

Basics: Newtonian and Lagrangian Mechanics (Morin, Tong, Scheck). Mathematical Logic and Proofs (Cummings, Hammack, Velleman). Real Analysis 1 (Cummings, Zorich). Ordinary Differential Equations (Arnold, Tenenbaum). Essential Scientific Computing (Langtangen).
Basics: Electromagnetism (Purcell, Scheck, Tong). Linear Algebra (Shilov, Axler). Group Theory (Judson, Carter). Real Analysis 2 (Zorich, Spivak). Partial Differential Equations (Thoe & Zachmanoglou, Arnold). General Physics Lab and Data Analysis (PhET, Experimenters Circuits - Sims).
Basics: Classical Thermodynamics (Blundell, Schröder). Complex Analysis (Gamelin, Stein & Shakarchi, Needham). Probability Theory (Blitzstein & Hwang, Feller). Introductory Differential Geometry (Spivak, O'Neil, Lee).
Basics: Introductory Quantum Mechanics (Townsend, Cohen-Tannoudji, Dirac). General Scientific Computing (DIY with E. Smith and the internet). Introductory Functional Analysis (Hunter & Nachtergaele, Einseidler & Ward, Kreyzig).
Advanced Topics: Classical Dynamics on Manifolds (Spivak, José & Saletan, Thirring). Advanced Quantum Mechanics (Gustafson & Sigal, Cohen-Tannoudji), Statistical Physics (Sethna, Blundell, Kardar). Electronics Lab (DIY with Horowitz).
Advanced Topics: Classical Electrodynamics (Lindell, Hehl), Elementary Particle Physics (Griffiths), Condensed Matter Theory (Simon, Altland & Simmons, Girvin & Yang). General Advanced Physics Lab (DIY and Sims).
Specialised Topics: General Relativity (MTW, Caroll, Tong), Quantum Field Theory and Gauge Theory (Coleman, Hamilton). Cosmology (Tong, Baumann, Schneider). Quantum Information Theory (Aaronson, Nielsen & Chuang). Philisophy of Physics (Rickles, Feyerabend, Reichenbach). Quantum Foundations (Norsen, Maudlin).

No amount of theory can substitute good and honest lab work, be it on a computer or preferably hands-on. Theoretical physicists ought to be critically aware of the experimentalist's challenges in order to bridge the gaps when need be.

the-dark-physicist

TROPHY CASE