Reddit Reddit reviews Introduction to Electrodynamics (3rd Edition)

We found 25 Reddit comments about Introduction to Electrodynamics (3rd Edition). Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.

Books
Engineering & Transportation
Engineering
Electrical & Electronics
Introduction to Electrodynamics (3rd Edition)
Check price on Amazon

25 Reddit comments about Introduction to Electrodynamics (3rd Edition):

u/bubble_gum272 · 44 pointsr/Physics

The Electrodynamics book by Griffiths is a standard textbook for a reason. He explains topics well and has good examples. This is the link to it.

u/[deleted] · 15 pointsr/Physics

Griffiths for Quantum Mechanics and E&M

Taylor's Classical Mechanics

Kittel & Kroemer for Statistical Thermodynamics

These are the only ones I can attest to personally, they're for undergraduate level understanding. Kittel&Kroemer can seem dense and difficult to understand at first, but once you work through problems and spend time on each chapter, it will become apparent how efficient the book is.

u/omgzpplz · 8 pointsr/Physics

David J. Griffiths: E+M book, QM book.

Chances are you recognize him now?

u/dicey · 7 pointsr/Physics

Author of two widely used undergratuate physics texts: one for Electricity and Magnetism and one for Quantum Mechanics. He also authored the somewhat-less-widely used (perhaps mainly because it's a specialist subject in most undergrad programs) Introduction to Elementary Particles.

u/nofacade · 6 pointsr/physicsbooks

I'm taking E&M now and we're using Griffiths. I'm not totally for sure, but I think it's the standard text for E&M.

u/2x4b · 4 pointsr/askscience

What level do you want it pitched at? The Wikipedia article is pretty good, and there's always Griffiths Electrodynamics.

u/woodne · 3 pointsr/Physics

I used Griffiths for my upper level Electro & Magnetostatics class.

http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Electrodynamics-3rd-David-Griffiths/dp/013805326X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1314035153&sr=8-1

Also I know the university I'm at uses the Griffiths book for Quantum Mechanics, however I have not taken the class.

http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Quantum-Mechanics-David-Griffiths/dp/0131118927/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1314035153&sr=8-2

Disclaimer: I am a math major.

u/South_Dakota_Boy · 2 pointsr/AskPhysics

Griffiths Electrodynamics would be a good thing to look at. It's surprisingly readable, and it could possibly wind up being your E&M textbook. In my undergrad, E&M was the "weed out" course, where those who weren't up to scratch lost interest in the physics degree, so it's good to get a head start. I wish I had started on it sooner. Maybe I'd have gotten more out of E&M as an undergrad and then Jackson in grad school wouldn't have been so hard.

u/anubis118 · 2 pointsr/AskReddit
u/john_o · 2 pointsr/Physics

Do you know what textbooks you'll be needing next year? It might be a good idea to get a hold of them early and familiarize yourself with the material.

The go to undergraduate E&M book is Griffith's, Introduction to Electrodynamics. E&M is tough for a lot of people, so it'd be nice to have a leg up by reading through some of this book before the semester starts. Griffith's writing style is really easy to follow and he tries to guide you threw important derivations without skipping around too much. There's a reason this book is so ubiquitous in undergraduate physics.

u/fdangelis · 2 pointsr/askscience

I've been writing for over an our... and then everything was lost because I pressed a wrong button. FML

Sorry but I won't write it all again. I will just say the main points and some links I had. Here is one regarding the whole point of the conversation.

> pμ = mvμ (this is the ratio of four-momentum to four-velocity) and is also the ratio of four-acceleration to four-force when the rest mass is constant, or, Fμ = mAμ.

There are some misconceptions here which I had all worked out... I will just say this so that you know. Basically any book about special relativity can explain this quite well. I think that Griffiths has a pretty good explanation of all that (although it's a electromagnetism book). You can look up the chapter 12.

There are some misconceptions like "So an object with zero mass means that it has no resistance to being accelerated by a force,". I won't explain all that again...

I'm really sorry and really pissed that I lost my comment, but this will have to do.

u/mnky9800n · 2 pointsr/AskReddit
u/pjfoster · 2 pointsr/askscience

Well, let's go back to your analogy with throwing a ball to your sister. Here, you and your sister would represent both positive (or both negative) charges. Now imagine that you're both standing on ice. When you throw the ball, you'll recoil a bit, and when the ball hit's your sister, she'll go backwards as well. The analogy breaks down for attractive charges. If you really want to understand how these forces work, I highly suggest getting a copy of Griffith's Intro to Electrodynamics. I'm not sure where you live, but I know in many countries this book comes in an "international edition" which has the same content, but is phenomenally cheaper.

u/zack1123581321 · 2 pointsr/PhysicsGRE

I am using Conquering the Physics GRE as an overview, but I really enjoy anything from David Morin and David J. Griffiths for the level of questions and explanations (and in-book/online solutions manuals that go a long way towards showing you how to think like a physicist). But my "library" for preparing for the physics GRE is:

CM: Morin, Problems and Solutions in Introductory Mechanics and Introduction to Classical Mechanics

Gregory, Classical Mechanics for extra explanations and problems

EM: Griffiths, Introduction to Electrodynamics 3e

QM: Griffiths, Introduction to Quantum Mechanics 3e

Thermo/Stat.Mech: Schroeder, An Introduction to Thermal Physics

Kittel and Kroemer, Thermal Physics

Waves: Morin, on his website are ten chapters to what appears to be a Waves book in the making

http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~djmorin/waves/

Atomic, Lab Methods: Conquering the Physics GRE and any online resources I can find.

​

If you email Case Western, they send a link to some amazing flash cards!

u/eebm · 1 pointr/columbia

I think PHYS 3007 uses Griffiths Introduction to Electrodynamics but I'm not entirely sure. Also I'm not sure which edition.

u/guenoc · 1 pointr/Physics

Sweet. I think the best curriculum to approach this with, assuming you're in this for the long haul, would be to start with building a good understanding of calculus, cover basic classical mechanics, then cover electricity and magnetism, and finally quantum mechanics. I'm going to leave math and mechanics mostly for someone else, because no textbooks come to mind at the moment. I'll leave you with three books though:

For Math, unless someone else comes up with something better, the bible is Stewart's Calculus

The other two are by the same author:

Griffith's Introduction to Electrodynamics

Griffith's Introduction to Quantum Mechanics

I think these are entirely reasonable to read cover to cover, work through problems in, and come out with somewhere near an undergraduate level understanding. Be careful not to rush things. One of the biggest barriers I've run into trying to learn physics independently is to try and approach subjects I don't have the background for yet: it can be a massive waste of time. If you really want to learn physics in its true mathematical form, read the books chapter by chapter, make sure you understand things before moving on, and do problems from the books. I'd recommend buying a copy of the solutions manuals for these books as well. It can also be helpful to look up the website for various courses from any university and reference their problem sets/solutions.

Good luck!

u/thirdtimesthecharm · 1 pointr/Physics
u/Alloran · 1 pointr/exjw

I do highly recommend Genome by Matt Ridley and A History of God by Karen Armstrong. It looks like Before the Big Bang might be a great idea too.

However, I'm noticing a bit of redundancy in your stacks and don't want you to get bored! In the presence of the other books, I would recommend Dawkins' The Ancestor's Tale in lieu of The Greatest Show on Earth. (Although, if you're actually not going to read all the other books, I would actually go the other way.) Similarly, I would probably choose either to read the God Delusion or a few of the other books there.

Other recommendations: how about The Red Queen by Matt Ridley, and The Seven Daughters of Eve by Bryan Sykes? These occupy niches not covered by the others.

The popular expositions on cosmology all look supremely awesome, but you should probably choose half of them. Another idea: read just The Fabric of the Cosmos by Greene, and if you love it, go ahead and learn mechanics, vector calculus, Electrodynamics, linear algebra, and Quantum Mechanics! Hmm...on second thought, that might actually take longer than just reading those books :)

u/starkeffect · 1 pointr/AskPhysics

You should probably start by cracking open a copy of a good E&M book, like this one, and learning the science, rather than relying on Einstein quotations.

Of course, that assumes you've already learned integral and differential calculus (which any 19-year-old science or engineering student has).

u/Stefanido · 1 pointr/ECE

We use Griffith's Electrodynamics in my physics program. He's very clear and conversational.

u/ccampo · 1 pointr/askscience

Talking about one universal electric field is counterintuitive. While RRC is technically correct, (EM fields do obey superposition, and are defined throughout all space), this is semantics and detrimental to learning if you are not an expert. Unfortunately, this is reddit, where semantics are the most important aspect of a post. There ARE individual electromagnetic fields. If you want, you can say that these all add together to form one giant universal field, but why would you (considering most drop off to ~zero in a relatively short distance)? When it comes to the universal aspect, think of the electromagnetic force as being universal.

To get to the questions.

  1. Not really. Electromagnetic fields are somewhat mathematical constructions. In fact, you can't actually measure an electric or magnetic field; you can only measure it's influence (the force it produces). I have always been taught that sources create electromagnetic fields. That is, distributions of charged particles create electric field, and current distributions create magnetic fields (these are static fields). In electrodynamics, electric and magnetic fields exist simultaneously. So much so, that they depend on one another. This all comes from Maxwell's equations. Maybe modern interpretation says that the electric field is more fundamental than charges, but I have never heard this before, and it is definitely not what they teach in university. This may be some more advanced and therefore subdued theoretical stuff.

    I can't actually DEFINE a GENERAL electromagnetic field in a common definition. I can only tell you that there are a set of partial differential equations that define how EM fields behave (Maxwell's equations, Lorentz force law), and solutions to these equations are electromagnetic fields.

  2. Do not think of electric fields in this matter. It isn't incorrect to say that there is a universal electromagnetic field, but it is not very insightful. It's better to think that charged objects create these fields, which affect other charged objects.

  3. Generally speaking, if there was no charge in the universe, there would be no electromagnetic fields. Again, you are confused with electromagnetic theory terminology. I recommend picking up a copy of Griffiths book on electrodynamics if you are interested in the subject matter.

  4. Yes. Classically, mass creates gravitational fields, while charges create electromagnetic fields. If two charges are placed near each other, they will experience an electromagnetic force, with it's strength and direction determined by the particle's position (as a function of time) and charge. Masses are similar, except the force is the force of gravity.

    Also, light does not propagate THROUGH electromagnetic fields. Light IS propagating electromagnetic fields. Light is known more generally as electromagnetic radiation, and it is simply energy that propagates in a wavelike fashion out to infinity, generated from the motion of charged particles.
u/blueboybob · 1 pointr/HomeworkHelp

halliday and resnick for general physics

1 - goldstein

2 - griffith

3 -

4 - griffith or jackson