Reddit reviews: The best magnetism in physics books

We found 24 Reddit comments discussing the best magnetism in physics books. We ran sentiment analysis on each of these comments to determine how redditors feel about different products. We found 8 products and ranked them based on the amount of positive reactions they received. Here are the top 20.

Top Reddit comments about Magnetism in Physics:

u/Second_Foundationeer · 9 pointsr/Physics

Easiest introduction (too simple, but a great overview):

Better introduction (actually has real mathematics, this is like the Chen book but better for people who want to learn actual plasma physics because it doesn't baby you):

Great introduction, and FREE:

Good magnetohydronamics book:

Great waves book:

Computational shit because half of plasma physics is computing that shit:


Then there are also great papers, and I posted some links to papers in a previous post, but if you're asking to start, you want to start with Chen (and if it's too simple for you, move onto Fitzpatrick or Goldston). I also forgot to mention that Bellan and Ichimaru also have great books for introductory plasma physics.


I'd also like to add that I love you because this subreddit almost never ever mentions plasma physics.

u/redditor62 · 8 pointsr/PhysicsStudents

It seems to me that introductory electromagnetism is, physically, very simple.

If the subject is difficult, I suspect it has more to do with the math than the physics. Unlike introductory mechanics, most problems in E/M rely heavily on vectors and vector calculus (and for many students E/M is also a first introduction to other more sophisticated mathematical ideas, like Laplace's equation and coordinate transformations).

As far as introductory level books go, though, I think Griffiths handles the added mathematical rigour of E/M quite well. Griffiths explains his math in great detail throughout the text, and chapter 1 is a thorough and complete, but straightforward and simple, treatment of vector calculus; I recommend that you study it in great detail (and work many problems) before continuing to the physics. Preparation in linear algebra is probably also helpful as well.

Also, keep in mind that there are several approaches to electromagnetism. As I recall, Griffiths develops the theory more or less historically, and only makes the connection with special relativity in the final chapters. If you want to look at the ideas from another angle, you could try a book like Purcell or Schwartz, which use special relativity to derive magnetism as a theoretical, rather than experimental, result. Personally, I find this approach more elegant, interesting, and even a little easier; nonetheless, understanding both approaches is important in the long run.

Edit: By the way, another book to consider is Shadowitz (I have only read the first 5 chapters, and I still recommend it on that basis alone). Shadowitz develops the basic theory very logically and consistently: chapters 2 through 5 cover the divergence and curl of E and B (one chapter each). At times the explanations are lengthy, but this might be useful for a struggling student.

u/Aeschylus_ · 4 pointsr/Physics

You're English is great.

I'd like to reemphasize /u/Plaetean's great suggestion of learning the math. That's so important and will make your later career much easier. Khan Academy seems to go all through differential equations. All of the more advanced topics they have differential and integral calculus of the single variable, multivariable calculus, ordinary differential equations, and linear algebra are very useful in physics.

As to textbooks that cover that material I've heard Div, Grad, Curl for multivariable/vector calculus is good, as is Strang for linear algebra. Purcell an introductory E&M text also has an excellent discussion of the curl.

As for introductory physics I love Purcell's E&M. I'd recommend the third edition to you as although it uses SI units, which personally I dislike, it has far more problems than the second, and crucially has many solutions to them included, which makes it much better for self study. As for Mechanics there are a million possible textbooks, and online sources. I'll let someone else recommend that.

u/mangoman51 · 1 pointr/Physics

Hi, I'm about to start a PhD in computational plasma physics in September, concentrating on simulating turbulent transport in the divertor region and the scrape-off layer of tokamaks.

I won a bit of money from my undergrad institution, and I thought it would be fitting to use it to buy some reference textbooks for my PhD. However, although it's easy to find books, it's not so easy to find good reviews of them. I haven't done much plasma physics before but I will be having a lot of lectures on it in September, so I think more advanced books would be more useful, as I will be recommended plenty of resources for the more basic stuff.

Some of the books I've been looking at are:

u/treeses · 2 pointsr/Physics

Now that the 3rd edition has been published, used copies of the 2nd edition of The Art of Electronics is super cheap. I think this is the best intro circuits book for self study. Alternatively, I've really enjoyed Practical Electronics for Inventors too, and it covers more modern stuff (like it has a chapter on arduino). Both of these start with the basics, though Practical Electronics written for a more general audience so it is easier on the math.

For electromagnetics, I've heard Electricity and Magnetism is pretty good. It does cover some circuits stuff, but so much of circuits is about electronic components that you really need a dedicated circuits book to understand them.

u/EagleFalconn · 3 pointsr/askscience

I said:

>A list of physics equations does not a physicist make.

You said:

>Of course, I totally agree!

My reaction: GREAT!

Then you said:

>I am looking for all of those laws either in PDF format or On a website where I can copy/paste.


Having a PDF of all the equations of all of physics wouldn't provide you with any understanding of any of them. You would be just as clueless as you are now, except you would've spent a great deal of effort compiling a PDF filled with equations you don't understand.

You appear to have missed the point of my post:

>Until you are prepared to sit down with a textbook and learn Newton's laws and the glycolysis cycle, you'll never really understand science.

I'm not trying to discourage you, I'm really not, but you have the kind of wide-eyed innocence that leads to just enough knowledge to be dangerous, but not enough to realize how little you understand.

Here is my favorite introductory physics book. In it, you'll learn Newton's laws and how to apply them. I'm also a fan of Volume 2, where you'll learn about electricity and magnetism. I'm not familiar with the newest editions, but I liked the first edition so feel free to pick them up used. Or heck, pirate the PDFs from somewhere.

You'll need a good grasp of calculus for both books, but if you seriously want to teach yourself physics, that is the kind of work that it takes. I don't have any good opinions on whats a good calculus book unfortunately, but I suggest you make it through derivatives and integrals before starting the physics books.

u/conquerer7 · 10 pointsr/Physics

Take a charge just sitting there, and suddenly whack it. A moving charge has a different electric field than a stationary one, it's strongest in the plane perpendicular to the motion. The field lines for this moving charge will be straight, but squished towards that plane.

But if you're a light year away, you can't know that instantly. You'll still see the same field that the stationary charge made. The information that the charge is now moving propagates out at the speed of light, so you get a shell moving outward in which the field suddenly shifts, from the stationary charge field to the moving charge field. That is a light wave.

You can also see from this description how the intensity depends on what angle you're at, and why it depends on acceleration (the faster you accelerate, the thinner the shell/wave and the bigger the change in E, so the big E in the shell is even bigger).

Why do you need acceleration? If the charge has been uniformly moving forever, the field will be "correct" everywhere. Of course, if you suddenly stop it, you'll launch another wave. If you move the charge sinusoidally, you'd get pretty much what you'd expect.

I can't draw a nice picture, but this is basically what's on the cover of the latest edition of Morin/Purcell E&M. That book is where I heard about this nice intuitive picture, which is great for people like me who can't do advanced math. :D


u/Higgs_Br0son · 2 pointsr/ucf

It was two different books 3 years ago for Physics for Engineers and Physics 2 for engineers. It could be a bit different now. Surefire way to tell is to email the Prof, or ask next week.

The Physics 1 book came with a code to do homework online via WebAssign, which was required. I didn't buy the physical book, I just bought the code that came with an e-book from the website. Physics 1 has been the same class for literally over a hundred years, so any text book will work if you're tight on money. Just be sure you can do the homework.

Physics 2 was a different book. The cover was black and green, with a little diagram of a red ball with a grid plane and spirally things around it. My class didn't have online homework. My class was also an experimental structure at the time, I forgot the acronym for it, but our lab and lecture were blended into one session. I'm pretty sure the normal style class used the same books.

Edit: /u/motsu35 remembered the title. This was my Physics 2 book. It looks like there is a part 1 which covers Physics 1, but I'm not sure if it's the book we used, since I never had the physical copy.

u/hes_a_dick · 5 pointsr/Physics

For freshman/ sophmore honors EM in the US, I think that's A-level in Britain or something? Anyways, Purcell and Morin's Electricity and Magnetism is absolutely great.

Basically it was written by Purcell, Nobel Prize winner in 1952, and uses special relativity and a few other assumptions to derive all of electricity and magnetism, rather than the other way around. Morin came along in the third edition, added a bunch of problems and changed the units from Gaussian to MKS. If your mechanics course covers some special relativity, I strongly recommend this book.

Warning, vector calculus is necessary, Purcell gives an overview, but it's not a full treatment.

Third edition with Morin's extra problems

u/_zen_calm_ · 6 pointsr/Physics

If I were you, I would study from Purcell (Berkeley physics course volume number 2). https://www.amazon.com/Electricity-Magnetism-Edward-M-Purcell/dp/1107014026 This is the best to begin with. And DO all the problems! After that if you still want better understanding, Griffiths - Introduction to electrodynamics is very good. Do not touch Feynman or Landau until you complete those 2, they are very bad for beginers but after you are familiar with the subject they are true gems.

u/TastyRat · 2 pointsr/chemistry

For EPR i have always liked N. M. Atherton, see here https://www.amazon.com/Principles-Electron-Resonance-Physical-Chemistry/dp/0137217625

Bit havy on the bra-ket notation, but well written

u/savetheplankton · 1 pointr/AskPhysics

Schaum's Outlines!

I checked out the physical copy at my Uni library in addition to using their (free) digital access to the pdf.
I got an A in the course using this for problems, I highly recommend it (also available for many other subjects, too!)

edit: formatting

u/drzowie · 1 pointr/AskPhysics

The Feynman Lectures may or may not be what you want to go through (they're better for reference than for learning), but If $20 for Volume 1, $8 for Volume 2, and $10 for Volume 3 is too expensive for you, you may not be sufficiently committed.

u/starkeffect · 2 pointsr/AskPhysics

Purcell's book on E&M starts with relativity and derives magnetism as a relativistic effect.

u/kiwi90 · 1 pointr/AskPhysics

I am actually struggling with this same question. I just started studying electromagnetic theory, and Feynman's entire book on this subject doesn't even mention photons!

As far as I can tell, there are different theories of light, there's Maxwell's field theory and there's the quantum theory which includes photons. As for which one light "really" is, it sounds like that's more in the realm of philosophy, and physicists just use the theory that works for a given situation.

u/nikofeyn · 14 pointsr/Physics

electricity and magnetism by purcell and morin

edit: as a counter to the griffiths suggestion, i have read good things about modern electrodynamics by zangwill, but i have no personal experience with the book.