OMG TEH JACKSON!

  • As many already know, studying for the physics GRE and getting accepted into a graduate program is not the final hurdle in your physics career.
  • There are many issues current physics graduate students face such as studying for their qualifier, deciding upon a field of research, choosing an advisor, being an effective teaching assistant, trying to have a social life, navigating department politics, dealing with stress, utilizing financial aid, etc.

User avatar
grae313
Posts: 2297
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 8:46 pm

OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby grae313 » Tue Sep 23, 2008 9:01 pm

:shock:

:P :P :P

yay gradschool

User avatar
quizivex
Posts: 1029
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:13 am

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby quizivex » Wed Sep 24, 2008 2:12 am

got mine for $50 on Amazon

let's get this party started

a bucket
Posts: 60
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 9:02 am

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby a bucket » Fri Sep 26, 2008 8:58 pm

$20 (practically new) from someone who decided to switch to math after taking Jackson.
As much as we all hate teh JacXXoR, it's probably the single most useful physics course you will ever take. Most departments make you take it because it's more useful for both theorists and experimentalists than any other physics course they'll take.

IMO, Jackson >> Griffiths.
Also, Landau & Lifshitz > >Jackson.
and, Pirates >> Ninjas >> All E&M textbooks.

On a related note, here's what wikipedia has to say about John David Jackson:
The name Jackson is infamous amongst physics graduate students who are, at many institutions, required to take an advanced course in theoretical electrodynamics taught out of J. D. Jackson's text Classical Electrodynamics. The course is well-known for its difficult homework problems and is referred to simply as “Jackson” in the field of physics. Many physicists who do not directly pursue research in the field of theoretical electrodynamics regard the Jackson course as a rite of passage in obtaining a Ph.D.

User avatar
dlenmn
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:19 pm

Or not

Postby dlenmn » Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:00 pm


User avatar
grae313
Posts: 2297
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 8:46 pm

Re: Or not

Postby grae313 » Tue Sep 30, 2008 11:16 am

dlenmn wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8T1aNg6v-L4


That was awesome! :lol:


Anyone else start off their E&M class with Landau and Lifshitz and chapters 11&12 in Jackson?

User avatar
twistor
Posts: 1531
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:47 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby twistor » Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 pm

For the record, ninjas > pirates.

User avatar
zxcv
Posts: 402
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:08 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby zxcv » Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:09 am

Yeah, we're in the midst of Jackson's chapters 11 and 12, too. E&M is far cooler than I expected it could be.

Odd thing: from Jackson's own institution, we aren't actually doing any problems out of the text. Our professor is writing all of his own problem sets, which if interesting are not very hard. Kind of disappointing...

User avatar
twistor
Posts: 1531
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:47 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby twistor » Mon Oct 06, 2008 10:49 am

The proliferation of solutions manuals on the internet has doubtless made problem sets from the book obsolete.

User avatar
quizivex
Posts: 1029
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:13 am

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby quizivex » Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:07 pm

zxcv wrote:from Jackson's own institution, we aren't actually doing any problems out of the text.

If you ever see Charles Kittel wandering around Berkeley, please flip him the finger. He deserves to be banished from the physics community after writing that atrocious solid state book, regardless of anything good he may have accomplished. :lol:

twistor wrote:The proliferation of solutions manuals on the internet has doubtless made problem sets from the book obsolete.

That's one of the reasons I'm glad we're not given course grades, especially since we're responsible for the prelim and general exams, which will test the same material and be plenty difficult themselves.

I haven't read far in Jackson yet, and I don't expect it to be easy, but I'm actually very pleased with some of the preliminary things in the text. Someone FINALLY explained to me precisely what it means to ground a conductor, and how it can be accomplished (*experimentally) to arbitrary precision. Previously, all profs would say to me is V=0, which is hardly satisfactory. They'd constantly say that grounding a circuit anywhere doesn't affect the circuit, but then i'd say what happens if you ground it in two places? They say then it gets shorted, so how can they say it's unaffected the first time?

Similarly for the grounded plane examples in Griffiths, does it matter where you ground the plane? Afterall if you ground it near the origin (which is what the diagrams for the problem often suggest), the ground wire itself will have a charge buildup that may affect the surroundings... etc... but anyway, all I'm saying is that Jackson's in depth analysis finally shed light on those matters. Also, he finally explained that Coulomb's law is indeed the underlying law of electrostatics, and that the Maxwell equations for div/curl of E were derived from it for solving problems where you don't know the charge distribution! And then he directly derived how the integral equation for V satisfies poisson's equation etc... So it looks like if I want to learn E&M once and for all, this is the right book.

User avatar
Kaiser_Sose
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 11:20 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby Kaiser_Sose » Mon Oct 06, 2008 8:17 pm

I have to concur with you on the Kittel book. Almost totally unreadable unless you already understand the material.

Dur !

User avatar
WontonBurritoMeals
Posts: 103
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 9:43 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby WontonBurritoMeals » Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:59 am

I mentioned Jackson to my professor after reading this thread. Turns out one of my labmates (one of the smartest guys I know) got a special T-shirt from Jackson. Which is cool.

May the wind be always at your back,
-WontonBurritoMeals

User avatar
zxcv
Posts: 402
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:08 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby zxcv » Sat Oct 11, 2008 4:39 am

Indeed: the reason why I still care about grades in grad school is that if I get one of the top 2 grades in E&M, I get a T-shirt signed by J. D. Jackson himself.

a bucket
Posts: 60
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 9:02 am

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby a bucket » Sat Oct 11, 2008 2:16 pm

zxcv wrote:Indeed: the reason why I still care about grades in grad school is that if I get one of the top 2 grades in E&M, I get a T-shirt signed by J. D. Jackson himself.

Can't I get one from Griffiths instead. He's so much more of a badass.

User avatar
quizivex
Posts: 1029
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:13 am

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby quizivex » Sun Oct 12, 2008 3:16 am

a bucket wrote:Can't I get one from Griffiths instead. He's so much more of a badass.


A Griffiths t-shirt would be awesome. It would have his signature and the following text:

"
Problem 3.11)
Consider a uniformly charged XL sized human being with the dimensions shown in Figure 3.24. Calculate the total flux through a 100% cotton Gaussian surface around his torso
.

D. Griffiths"

zxcv wrote:the reason why I still care about grades in grad school is that if I get one of the top 2 grades in E&M, I get a T-shirt signed by J. D. Jackson himself.

Ah awesome, good luck. Too bad we have no incentives to do well in our first semester classes (except a better chance of passing prelims lol). Even if we had an incentive like that, I couldn't see myself getting in the top two, especially having around 10 Chinese students with really thick glasses in my class. Oh wait, you go to a UC... so you wouldn't have that problem. :wink:

hahha oh that was funny, no offense anyone. :lol: please no polls.

Bufalay
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2004 5:05 am

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby Bufalay » Thu Oct 16, 2008 4:04 pm

[quote]Anyone else start off their E&M class with Landau and Lifshitz and chapters 11&12 in Jackson?[/quote]

Cornell style.

physicienne
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 7:31 am

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby physicienne » Tue Dec 09, 2008 7:53 am

haha, my first sem of grad school effectively kept this site off the radar, but even if it's more than two months late i will add my 2 cents:

panofsky & phillips, anyone? my prof is pro-practical uses of e&m (-> experimental over theoretical, and to him panofsky was god-like), but i hate this book. i actually prefer jackson (even though we also do problems from it, heh). so in comparison to jackson, we also began in the middle - not 11&12, though we were instructed by my mechanics prof to go there for relativity in lieu of goldstein. 11&12 are fodder for next semester, apparently.

did anyone else get a copy of jackson with the fuzzy mountains on the jacket? what's up with that? at least find a better (sharper) picture ...

User avatar
grae313
Posts: 2297
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 8:46 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby grae313 » Thu Dec 11, 2008 2:50 pm

OMG TEH JACKSON.... IS OVER!!!!!!!!

:D :D Sorry, I just got out of my final... time to get drunk!

User avatar
a13ean
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 1:24 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby a13ean » Sun Jan 25, 2009 9:59 am

blanked
Last edited by a13ean on Wed Aug 14, 2013 11:30 am, edited 1 time in total.

cato88
Posts: 420
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:46 am

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby cato88 » Wed Mar 04, 2009 9:00 pm

Do you guys have any advice for preparing for using Jackson. What math techniques were common?
Any concepts that took a while? Any advice on picking up those concepts.

User avatar
grae313
Posts: 2297
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 8:46 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby grae313 » Wed Mar 04, 2009 10:22 pm

cato88 wrote:Do you guys have any advice for preparing for using Jackson. What math techniques were common?
Any concepts that took a while? Any advice on picking up those concepts.


Actually most of Jackson isn't that bad, I would just recommend Mathematica to save you hours of really gross algebra and ugly integrals. The part that gave me trouble was at the beginning of our course--we started from Landau and Lifshitz Classical Theory of Fields and CHs 11 and 12 in Jackson, which you probably won't do. If you anticipate covering this in your class, review (or teach yourself) tensor math/notation and relativity.

User avatar
WhatCanYouDoFermi?
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:32 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby WhatCanYouDoFermi? » Thu Mar 05, 2009 6:38 pm

If grad EM isn't a requirement of your program, is it really necessary to take it or to read Jackson for your own benefit and personal enlightenment? I feel that having gone through all of Griffiths in gory detail I thoroughly understand the subject and I wonder what the next level up of classical EM contains that I haven't already seen. Maybe I am just ignorant, but is it necessary for most research areas?

cato88
Posts: 420
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:46 am

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby cato88 » Thu Mar 05, 2009 9:05 pm

WhatCanYouDoFermi? wrote:If grad EM isn't a requirement of your program, is it really necessary to take it or to read Jackson for your own benefit and personal enlightenment? I feel that having gone through all of Griffiths in gory detail I thoroughly understand the subject and I wonder what the next level up of classical EM contains that I haven't already seen. Maybe I am just ignorant, but is it necessary for most research areas?

Thats the basic physics evolution.

a) learn something think you know it all
b) realize there is a whole lot you dont know
c) back to a)

applied to classical mechanics

a) Newtonian Mechanics
b)
c) Lagrangians Hamiltonians

Grad E&M seems to be required at pretty much every PhD program.

User avatar
Helio
Posts: 809
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 7:11 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby Helio » Thu Mar 05, 2009 9:13 pm

cato88 wrote:
WhatCanYouDoFermi? wrote:If grad EM isn't a requirement of your program, is it really necessary to take it or to read Jackson for your own benefit and personal enlightenment? I feel that having gone through all of Griffiths in gory detail I thoroughly understand the subject and I wonder what the next level up of classical EM contains that I haven't already seen. Maybe I am just ignorant, but is it necessary for most research areas?

Thats the basic physics evolution.

a) learn something think you know it all
b) realize there is a whole lot you dont know
c) back to a)

applied to classical mechanics

a) Newtonian Mechanics
b)
c) Lagrangians Hamiltonians

Grad E&M seems to be required at pretty much every PhD program.


i can just say from sitting in grad EM... it is basically finding the green function for the weirdest geometries possible

User avatar
grae313
Posts: 2297
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 8:46 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby grae313 » Thu Mar 05, 2009 9:57 pm

Helio wrote:i can just say from sitting in grad EM... it is basically finding the green function for the weirdest geometries possible


If by weird geometries you mean rectangular, spherical, and cylindrical....


grad e&m is not required here, and probably not necessary for my research. It depends on what you are interested in and where you go. Greens functions are important. I considered it a right of passage of sorts, and most of the 1st years were taking it, and I like E&M, so I went ahead and took it but I don't think it's essential for everybody.

User avatar
Helio
Posts: 809
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 7:11 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby Helio » Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:37 pm

grae313 wrote:
Helio wrote:i can just say from sitting in grad EM... it is basically finding the green function for the weirdest geometries possible


If by weird geometries you mean rectangular, spherical, and cylindrical....


grad e&m is not required here, and probably not necessary for my research. It depends on what you are interested in and where you go. Greens functions are important. I considered it a right of passage of sorts, and most of the 1st years were taking it, and I like E&M, so I went ahead and took it but I don't think it's essential for everybody.


more like combinations of those, plus different potentials... it looks messy after a while

User avatar
a13ean
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 1:24 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby a13ean » Fri Mar 20, 2009 2:07 pm

I've noticed that only one semester is required for a lot of programs -- which seems to be the first six or so chapters of Jackson.

matonski
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:03 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby matonski » Thu Mar 26, 2009 12:35 pm

quizivex wrote:If you ever see Charles Kittel wandering around Berkeley, please flip him the finger. He deserves to be banished from the physics community after writing that atrocious solid state book, regardless of anything good he may have accomplished. :lol:

Do you have any introductory solid state books that you would recommend?

User avatar
dlenmn
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby dlenmn » Thu Mar 26, 2009 3:00 pm

Just dive in with Ashcroft/Mermin. That book is real good.

User avatar
kobayashi_maru
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 1:53 am

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby kobayashi_maru » Sun Mar 29, 2009 12:09 am

dlenmn wrote:Just dive in with Ashcroft/Mermin. That book is real good.
I completely agree. I don't have the hate for Kittel that most people seem to, but I've been reading both Kittel and Ashcroft/Mermin on all the subjects we've done this semester, and A/M definitely gives a much more sophisticated and understandable explanation across the board (at least as far as I've gotten).

My strategy has been to read a chapter in Kittel straight through, without pausing to work through any of the derivations or anything. Then I'll read the corresponding chapters in Ashcroft/Mermin, paying attention to details and making sure I understand everything as well as I can. It's been working well so far.

slugger
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:12 am

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby slugger » Wed Jun 24, 2009 3:14 pm

Hey guys, I started sifting through Jackson about a week ago in prep for quals and EM next semester. Could anyone reccommend a companion text that might fill in a few of the subtler points of the derivations in Jackson? Some sections seem so logical and clear and then other sections I feel like he just writes down an equation and 2 sentances "explaining" it. I wish someone would publish an annotated version with notes and stuff in the margins.

User avatar
grae313
Posts: 2297
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 8:46 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby grae313 » Wed Jun 24, 2009 3:23 pm

slugger wrote:...other sections I feel like he just writes down an equation and 2 sentances "explaining" it.



Two whole sentences?! Usually he just writes "it is clear that..." or "it is trivial to show that..." and of course it's not at all clear or trivial.

slugger
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:12 am

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby slugger » Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:13 pm

No, i hear you...its a total pain, but is there really no one out there that knows of a nice little companion? The dover book by schwartz looked like it was pretty thorough in its derivations, especially in the relativistic stuff, but it looked like it was lacking in other more important topics (green functions didnt even appear in the index). Any help would be great.

User avatar
twistor
Posts: 1531
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:47 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby twistor » Thu Jul 02, 2009 4:35 pm

OMG TEH JACKSON...HE'S DEAD.

I know, I'm a little late, but I forgot about this thread.

ultraballer2000
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 4:51 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby ultraballer2000 » Fri Dec 10, 2010 3:08 am

dear Jackson,

suckit.

love,

Ultraballer2000

FNR
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 9:48 pm

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby FNR » Fri May 06, 2011 10:12 pm

Guys,

I found this Downfall parody video about how much Hitler hates Jackson EM book:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jq2ToKN9hRo


Apparently, even he can't stand Jackson after one full semester of EM course. :mrgreen:

User avatar
Dorian_Mode
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 6:17 am

Re: OMG TEH JACKSON!

Postby Dorian_Mode » Sat May 07, 2011 12:52 am

I think I may be in the only grad E&M course that doesn't use Jackson. Our professor is a fan of Panofsky and Phillips, accompanied by about two reams worth of additional notes that he hands out over the course of the class. One thing Panofsky has going for it: that book is cheap.




Return to “Current Physics Graduate Student Topics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest