I actually took the first semester of graduate E&M from Dave Jackson himself at Berkeley in 1984. He was actually quite a good teacher. At one point we stumped him on an example where his text said that the derivation of a result was "trivial." After failing to produce the derivation, he told us to note every place he used the phrase "is trivial," "can be easily shown," etc. in the book so he could remove them in the 3rd edition. :-) He did come up with the derivation in the next class. It was, indeed, trivial - if you saw the completely non-obvious trick, that is!
@@tsham5940 For me it's classical mechanics three months without practising classical mechanics and even a simple block on a hill or rope questions can cause mayhem for me.
@@theworstxxx7123 Classical is a gigantic field. The road from Loney to Goldstein is a very steep and exhausting climb. I made the huge mistake of skipping straight to Goldstein, (because everyone I asked recommended that book to me). Needless to say, I found myself in the same spot as you. Now I have ordered a copy of Kleppner&Koenkow and planning to start from zero.
@@MrGangeva What book? Maxwell never wrote a book, he only wrote some papers. Also, the modern formulation of Maxwell's equations that in any way resembles anything useful was created by Oliver Heaveside. That guy was the real Chad
@@oleksiishekhovtsov1564 i know about maxwell treatise book on EM, the pdf version is sooo heavy my computer couldn't even open it properly (i think all pages where image scans) xD
Griffiths is like a relationship with your first crush. You're always discovering new and exciting things, you can't wait to see where it's going to go next, and when it's over you think you're ready for something more serious. Jackson is like getting through a marriage.
I think I found out the reason why there are little to no examples in graduate level math books. It's easier to derive the formula than it is to solve a problem with it.
@The Great Bodhisattva Hachiman Clearly f'''(x)>0 as well since I'm positive Jackson was a jerk! I actually learned he wrote this atrocity while he was a professor at my university.
@The Great Bodhisattva Hachiman nope. He means y = a/x Because clearly neither of those can be negative, and they’re supposed to be inversely proportional. ‘a’ is the proportionality constant and varies from person to person.
@@MrCount84 No you don't. Stop fooling yourself kid, you know absolutely nothing about physical science. Attitude like that will get you know where. Be humble because there is always someone who is smarter than you and will expose you.
Alex V Not really. In all fairness, the name is super straightforward. Hydrodynamics is the study of fluids and their dynamics. Magnetohydrodynamics is then the study of charged fluids and electromagnetic fields in said fluids. It's not particularly hard for a high schooler to figure out. There is no need to be an *asshole.*
A grad student told me how his professor or something along those lines met Jackson in a plane. Apparently this professor or what not told him "so Jackson, that was a pretty tough book you wrote" and soft spoken Jackson responded something along the lines of "I didn't think it was that bad"
@@rocketsoccer1 : Same for us math profs. Thing is, you lay out exactly what the considerations are, and efficient ways to attack problems, and everybody shows they get it on the homework. And you even lift questions from OLD tests that you make available to your students, as well. And when 2/3 of them bomb, but 1/3 of them NAIL IT, you figure that the other 2/3 have holes in their foundation, didn't do their due diligence, or failed to ask questions. Change the numbers in a public-domain test that you told them the next test was based on, and when people STILL mess it up, but some people ace it, you realize it was NOT that bad. If you listen to students about difficulty-level, the standard for an engineering degree would be mastery of 2 + 2 = 4. Luckily, there are always some teachers who believe in preserving standards and rigor. And weak students hate them. And we care. But not enough to change our ways.
@@harrymills2770 Good that some are still sticking to the approach. What has ended up happening here is that courses where any kind of standards and rigor are maintained end up having no attendances. Meanwhile the courses which amount to daycare are fully packed. It can not work like this, it should be made very clear to students that obtaining a degree is a full time job. Otherwise I may as well ask a refund, daycare for 20 year olds is not what was advertised.
Who else watches these videos but isn't actually taking physics in university? Like I have no clue what's going on half the time but they're still so interesting
I was talking with an old mentor of mine, who got his PhD in the 60s, about how strange it is to have finished all the core undergrad physics classes - like, I've actually learned all the fundamentals now! He laughed and told me I haven't /really/ taken all the fundamental physics classes until I take E&M with the Jackson book. I love that this experience literally transcends generations.
My deep personal sense of ambition and love for knowledge: I WILL go to grad school for physics and i WILL make a difference My mathematical ineptitude/jackson's Classical Electrodynamics: *no you ain't*
You will go far with that attitude my friend. If you are interested in real physics(not that popular crap) it is a clue to yourself that your mind is capable. Work hard, stay hungry for knowledge, be persistent because you will fail many times, and just keep going. You will meet many great scientists across many fields. It truly is an orgasmic experience for any nerd out there.
@@_Nibi Yeah, I think it is rather ridiculous but it is a way of getting the form of a Green's function? I don't know. I certainly wouldn't spend much time on it LOL
If you have nice geometry it's really nice. It also works for waves, not just electrostatics. But maybe I just think it's nice because I do lighting research where treating a storm as charges above an infinite flat ground plane is a pretty good approximation.
Couple of years ago in undergrad, on electrodynamic theory course the professor casually mentioned it for good documentation when we were studying Maxwell's tensor so...I googled, I peaked....then I ran never to look back. Holy crap.
See this is the kinda content I like. You should go through textbook chapters too and maybe do problems with us. Teach us as you go so we can in a way follow along in the textbook with you.
I graduated in physics, but did my masters and am currently pursuing my PhD in pure mathematics. This sort of laid-back "table-of-contents-of-a-book review" makes me nostalgic for studying physics again. It reminded me of Classical Theory of Fields by Landau & Lifshitz, which was one of my favourite books in undergrad.
In my world (applied EM), whenever someone asks whether we can do something analytically, the go-to answer if no one knows is "Maybe Jackson has it?" If not, then the answer is no, no you cannot.
I'm a 68-year-old chemist who was trained in physical-theoretical chemistry at Cornell. Over 40 years ago, when I was graduate student and postdoc, Jackson was infamous - even then.
I studied Jackson back in the early 1980s. The book was intimidating at first, but I really grew to like it. I often referred to it in my career when I needed to understand something about electromagnetic wave propagation and interaction with materials. (I was developing semiconductor devices for detecting visible light, infrared, x-rays/gamma-rays, etc.) I think it's "infamous" reputation is somewhat undeserved. However, the problems at the end of each chapter were often challenging. I remember writing out pages of math for each problem.
Whole heartedly disagree. Jackson's infamous reputation is well deserved. The lack of examples and details on derivations throughout the book leaves the readers constantly confused and busy with attempting to find the steps inbetween. Unless you happen to be lucky to have an exceptional undergraduate career and a knowledgable professor teaching classical E&M you will mostly be lost throughout the course. As it stands, the Jackson book is terrible for self teaching and only shines when in the specific case previously mentioned.
The magnetohydrodynamics chapter is great if you've taken a course in fluid dynamics, you will already know like half the math. The thing about the book for me is that it's kind of a tedious read, but it's interesting because it does introduce a lot of techniques that are not common in undergrad EM courses. Also, the exercises are brutally long, so be aware of that.
the honors undergrads at our school (MIT) used Jackson in their sophomore year (which was taught by Kleppner). i think most students complain about it due to the tedious math involved in comparison to the ratio of actual physics. on the other hand, it did help me with my GR material due to this nature (with the PDE techniques and such). coming from a math background, i would argue that Baby Rudin is proportionally more difficult for its intended audience level than Jackson, if you have ever gone through that text. so i'd say it just gets a bad rap from the tedious math, that's all. nothing to be intimidated about imo
Hey - I'm in a similiar boat. Undergrad and my EM class goes all the way to the covariant formulism of Maxwells eq. Any tips? The only other EM class I've had was on Halliday/Purcell niveau.
@@davidm6624 if you've completed Purcell, you should be pretty much good to go since Purcell is fairly rigorous. i don't have too much advice for EM specifically as it's not a subject i struggled much with, but i would say that if you're having trouble, then the bottleneck is your math and not your physics skills as generally the physics should be self-contained in most advanced texts. for the topics i did have issues with, i found that cycling through different literature until i found the one that clicked to my perspective was what usually did it for me. so just remember that you are there to learn EM, not to study Jackson's text or any other book as a religious bible as your primary goal. if you don't like the book your class is using, find a different one!
@@davidm6624 Write it all out and just guess like a good physicist or use GR notation and the tensor notation is so easy for Maxwell's eq. The exercise will pretty much learn you how to use tensor notation though.
Love Jackson's book. I had taken in my 5th year after using Lorrain and Corson in my 3rd yr EM. I used Jackson as my reference throughout my career as an RF engineer. I still have this book in my home library that I pull out and read time to time. I now ask myself why this was so challenging when I was a young student.
My professor started with Chapter 11-12 (which is in Gaussian units) and then went back to chapters 1,2,3,etc. Our course was also all in one semester. This was my first semester of grad school. I was not ready. I have a feeling that you may get frustrated at times, but ultimately you'll probably do well, especially with the later chapters. I wish you the best!
Before watching: It's Jackson. About to finish the book - The text itself is tough sure, but those problems... hollllly shit. Smacks you over the head right away
@@Upgradezz I mean, I think Wald is harder, Birelle and Davies is harder, etc, but they're also more advanced than E+M, you know? So, for EM, Jackson is very difficult and it's mainly because of those problems.
radwizard definitely much more difficult than Purcell - Jackson actually references Purcell as being the undergrad standard (in the preface) from which Jackson’s book is sorta built on
beatleplayer1011 they told us in my program that we use Purcell for EM because it behoves us to learn this for other books we will use in the future. If Jackson is worth it, my school most certainly uses it. Now Im going to order a copy if Jackson so I can practice for the future. Thanks Dude for the info.
I had Jackson as a professor in undergrad physics. He was smart (duh), fascinating, challenging, demanding, rigorous, yet compassionate, and fair. I remember he once marked an exam question wrong after I got the right answer. He said we could not use the equation we used because it had been derived from assumptions that did not apply to the question at hand... even though the equation always produced the correct answer. He would never accept weak reasoning. He was the department chair at the time and always had time for his students.
Jackson is over two decades old and there are now more modern treatises on Electromagnetic Theory. Jackson is a great reference, as are others, even Landau & Lifshitz, which is even older.
I once read that Landau's mentorship was called "A school of puppies". I.e., he throwed his students into "the pond" of physics. If they got "to the shore", they could qualify for a career in physics. If they didn't - oh, well...
Just checked it on wiki, Landau wrote the ten books while in prison, they cover a bunch of different fields. It's really f-ing insane, the man was a beast
Jaja, year? I know this is a comment from like 4 years ago, but I gotta vent somewhere. literally this is my first class of EM in undergrad school, my fourth year in college, one single semester. I kinda had an introduction with sears in my second year general physics course, but now it's the real thing. Our teacher really likes Jackson. like REALLLLY likes. So, in my first EM class, I have to read in parallel both Grifiths and Jackson. We do the hardest exercises from Griffith, and the easiest exercises from Jackson, all with Jackson level math.
My weeks are like, day one, did five exercises from Griffith, I feel like I'm ready for everything day two, did exercise 1.a from Jackson, feel like crying. day three, tried doing 1.b, cried instead. rest of the week, do an exercise cry then repeat. bonus cry on weekends tho!
I used Jackson at undergrad... though I must say I didn’t cover half of what was in it. Anyone doing undergrad EM don’t be afraid of the book, you don’t need everything that’s in it and for me it was so much better than Griffith’s
@@AndrewDotsonvideos excellent. With the techniques of Ch3, you'll be able to take the building's boundary conditions into account with spherical harmonics and bessel functions prior to flinging yourself off of it. The manner in which this is possible is trivial and is left to you as an exercise
This scares me, because I just finished an undergraduate E&M course where all of my assignments were 34 pages or longer, but I know I write more than my classmates... Grad school is gonna be something else!
It is a good book, I went through in EE E&M, good explanations, problems not so much lol. There's a rumor that a grad student asked Jackson himself about a particular problem. Jackson took one look at the problem and said 'I don't know how to solve that' and walked away.
Oh I remember Jackson E&M from my grad school days. I still remember the problem of solving and plotting the radiation field of a rotating square as well as all the electrostatic problems that took me hours to solve.
For your integral, researching Spence functions and Dilogarithms might be of some help. 't Hooft and Veltman also did quite a bit of work in this field. Hope it turns out fine. I had to calculate weak interaction one-loop vertices this semester and man, those can be tough as well. :)
How did you end up working integrals for Feynman diagrams before owning a copy of Jackson? By the time I even had a clue of how Feynman diagrams work, I had two copies of Jackson, one for my office, and one to keep inside the truck for when I got caught in a hurricane. Page 314 to 316 in Jackson changed my life. I saw the light panorama chart and from that point, I knew I had to work in the physics of air pollution. Jackson explained Mother Nature in a way I had never seen before or since. I'm lucky to have shared some emails with Professor Jackson once back in 2002, he was hilarious. I loved that man. His book is the common thread of all living physicists.
Sitting here watching you while holding my copy of Jackson from 1964 ... Published in 1963 and has matching chapters from your new copy... For the quals, both written and oral, I sweated out anything sourced from Jackson... When you are a bodybuilder, everything starts with the bench press and Jackson was the equivalent in grad physics...
We used Landau/Lifshitz plus Jackson in graduate E&M. Funny thing is, I found my undergrad E&M course (with Griffiths) more challenging than my graduate E&M course. However, this was due to the different professors and their teaching styles rather than the inherent difficulty of the textbooks.
Jackson just has some really really involved computations, the truly terrifying textbooks are the ones in QFT where half the time you're not even sure the expressions you're working with exist at all
In the mid-90's, I took undergrad E&M. We used both Jackson and Griffiths. When I got to grad school E&M, I had already been pretty thoroughly through the book. Never heard it had this kind of reputation. I was basically taught that if you want a first pass at a topic, use Griffiths. If you want a reference book that covers it all in detail, that's Jackson.
I took The course on classical electrodynamics at CAL Berkeley in 1970 using this textbook and taught by Professor Jackson himself. I recall (hopefully accurately) him making this statement, "Every year I reread Landau's text on electromagnetics, and learn a little more..." And yes, I found his text anything but fun to read.
I, too, have my copy of Jackson 2nd Edition. My prof was Dr. Yan Lwin, who had been one of Jackson’s students. I did grad school at age 45 and suffered through it!
jackson experience be like: 3 undegrad lectures in half a page. the equation is: this the time-averaged solution is: this how one leads to the other is trivial.
The moment when your professor in undergrad thermodynamics sends you to read the Jackson e&m book to learn how magnetic effects of solids depend on thermodynamic variables
The classical self-energy of point particles is a classic old problem. As old as the original idea of the column potential/force. Yes the Jackson problems were the most difficult. It was 30 years ago but I think it was choosing the appropriate coordinates and the necessary coordinate transformations to solve for systems of point particles and various conducting and non conduction curvilinear objects.
You didn't cover waveguides in undergraduate E&M? I was so glad I did, because within a year of graduating I was working in satellite communications where waveguides are used. Our U/G E&M text was Jordan and Balmain's "Electromagnetic Waves and Radiating Systems", 2nd Edition. I still have it, and I still feel a slight tinge of panic when I take it off the bookshelf.
I spent entire weekends solving homework problems from Jackson’s book. It was indeed a rite if passage in my first year of graduate school. I later had a course in atomic physics taught by Jackson. His lectures were incredibly organized so that the when bell rang , he had just completed the lecture, leaving all the boards completely with neatly written equations.
I was by no means the strongest E&M student, but I'm really surprised by how hard everyone seems to find wave guides. I had been struggling through most of my grad classes, but wave guides and special relativity just made perfect sense to me. It was things like Green's functions and other integrals that I struggled with.
As an electrical engineer, electromagnetics kicked my ass at first. I thought I understood the concepts, but on the first (infamous) exam where we had to apply Gauss' law to spheres with holes and all that stuff, I totally screwed up. Later on in college though I took two more engineering electromagnetics classes (Smith Charts, RF principles, wave guides, TE and TM propagation modes, total internal reflection, cavity radiation, noise, etc) and an antenna course. Electromagnetics is one of those subjects where the more you read about it, the more you realize how little you know. There are just so many different scenarios and properties of EM waves. Example? look up Zenneck waves,
I know what it will be already. Jackson E&M!!!! :D. I'll be seeing it next year. Back in undergrad we used an obscure Dover text and on my own I worked through Corson and Lorraine which is Excellent. (I need to do that again)
I took E&M with Francis Low (who basically pulled his whole classes out from his memory! at 70!). Later on, his class notes became his book. I actually enjoyed the classes, and we also used Jackson's as a reference book too. For me J's book still is THE reference for E&M.
I'm going to have to commend you for your colloquial and human faceplate you are bringing to the domain of discourse. I'm just some 30 something old black dude from Detroit that is trying to get a sense of what is going to be expected of me as I try to make my cnc warehouse job into my own combinatorial disciplined binary....I have been working on first order logic and the nomenclature that is at minimum needed for the abstraction of what I need to be a better student and provide a better educational environment for my kids. You just don't know how much you have helped me out with the void internal information exchange that you provided. I have a bit more confidence that I am capable of translating my skillset into an actual real measured education not bound to being a button pusher in a dimly lit warehouse. I saw the canned cycles coordinates on my g&m code display and little did I know that I was observing a abellian group matrix.....I have never seen a matrix or even had a use for it.....now I have been using a gaussian manifold and a tesseract to isolate lie groups from their cardinal hierarchical identity to perturb modular components and develop a min/max parameter for absolute production tolerances and optimize my own skillset. The induction regression system of engineering endgame backwards to my own origin is finally getting me ahead and I can now see that the whole process of higher education has a lot to do with the individuals abilities to make a fixed point for progressive results while continuing to make floating point questions that all seem to have a field discipline gradient that is accessible to give a better abstract perspective and embed your personal ability to get a better understanding of what you're looking at and how to do rigorous learning techniques. Whew.....thank you 100% my dude
well, after reading a lot of undergraduate text and getting taught about basic S-L problems and orthogonal function expansion as well as green's function, I finally got my own copy of Jackson
the book is actually a death notebook maintained by JD himself, graduate students all arpund the world who refers to this book gets automatically mentioned in the original book and every midnight the further pages tranforms into a mystical language by the screams of the previous students begging grad students not to fall into the trap so they make it less readable to save our lives😔😔
I took Jackson E&M with someone whose PhD adviser's PhD adviser was Jackson. I took this class (part 2, so radiation) at the same time, and on the same day of the week, as quantum mechanics and general relativity. All first year grad school, three years ago. That quarter was a total blur.
Jackson talks about the stress tensor way back in chapter 6. I didn't remember it at all until we did a podcast on it -- probably because we didn't have any problems on it. He even gets into the problems with defining it, which I thought was really cool. Still, I don't think Jackson really helps you understand it. Schwartz's Principles of Electrodynamics, however, uses it a lot so you do get a good idea about how to apply it there.
So much nostalgia at 2:26. I remember writing those equations down, memorizing them... *sigh* 😂😂 Jackson was a nightmare, by far the longest equations I've written were from grad level E&M.
The Jackson stands in my bookshelf for 20+ years but I hardly ever had a look into it. In fact, I rather used the Philippow, a book for Engineers. Still I got a PhD in Physics.
Not sure if you've heard of it but the textbook that my school used for the first E&M course is Electricity and Magnetism by Purcell. It was a really brutal introduction to E&M if I have to say so myself.. thankfully we are using Griffiths next time around. But man after getting through that made me feel that I can do any course.
Man, I really miss the days when I actually knew some of this stuff. Oh well, I just downloaded the PDF of the third edition of the Jackson book for free. Pretty daunting stuff, but I can at least dream about reading it and understanding it!
I actually took the first semester of graduate E&M from Dave Jackson himself at Berkeley in 1984. He was actually quite a good teacher. At one point we stumped him on an example where his text said that the derivation of a result was "trivial." After failing to produce the derivation, he told us to note every place he used the phrase "is trivial," "can be easily shown," etc. in the book so he could remove them in the 3rd edition. :-)
He did come up with the derivation in the next class. It was, indeed, trivial - if you saw the completely non-obvious trick, that is!
Kate Ebneter : E&M Seems to be the kind of topic that just rusts in the brain if it’s not practiced quiet frequently .
@@tsham5940 For me it's classical mechanics three months without practising classical mechanics and even a simple block on a hill or rope questions can cause mayhem for me.
That is a Wonderful story Kate!!!
@@tsham5940 god I thought I was alone.
@@theworstxxx7123 Classical is a gigantic field. The road from Loney to Goldstein is a very steep and exhausting climb.
I made the huge mistake of skipping straight to Goldstein, (because everyone I asked recommended that book to me). Needless to say, I found myself in the same spot as you.
Now I have ordered a copy of Kleppner&Koenkow and planning to start from zero.
I don't even study physics why am I here
wait dont go
@@AndrewDotsonvideos Came from youtube recommended, stayed for the beard.
Studying CS now, praying that these poor integral bois will find a job
@@mattbutner8907 Haha jokes on you! I'm a math major ;_;
same here, i'm an engineering major
The virgin Griffiths vs the CHAD Jackson.
All of them are virgins
@@franknillard reading directly from maxwell's book is chad
@@MrGangeva What book? Maxwell never wrote a book, he only wrote some papers. Also, the modern formulation of Maxwell's equations that in any way resembles anything useful was created by Oliver Heaveside. That guy was the real Chad
@@oleksiishekhovtsov1564 i know about maxwell treatise book on EM, the pdf version is sooo heavy my computer couldn't even open it properly (i think all pages where image scans) xD
As I was introduced to incel lingo through madamme contrapoints I can only imagine u type in Natalie's voice 🤣
Griffiths is like a relationship with your first crush. You're always discovering new and exciting things, you can't wait to see where it's going to go next, and when it's over you think you're ready for something more serious. Jackson is like getting through a marriage.
B r u h 😂
Wow
Perfect. Just perfect. :D
bruh that package lookin like a thicc ravioli
Grad students could eat on it for a week.
ravioli ravioli, what's in the pocketoli?
@@amircanto5416 *Moans Loudly*
didn't expect to find you here
The readability of Jackson was a function of page number: the further you go the less he explains. Plus your will power begins to wane.
Actually, there was a part in the middle about relativistic E&M that really made sense to me. But otherwise, yeah. Wave guides made my brain explode.
I think I found out the reason why there are little to no examples in graduate level math books. It's easier to derive the formula than it is to solve a problem with it.
Isn't this the norm? (Pun intended.)
@The Great Bodhisattva Hachiman Clearly f'''(x)>0 as well since I'm positive Jackson was a jerk!
I actually learned he wrote this atrocity while he was a professor at my university.
@The Great Bodhisattva Hachiman nope. He means
y = a/x
Because clearly neither of those can be negative, and they’re supposed to be inversely proportional.
‘a’ is the proportionality constant and varies from person to person.
“Magnetohydrodynamics” you physicists just make these names up to make stuff sounds impossibly difficult right
Nooope!
We just give difficult names to honestly difficult things.
I have only a high school physics background and I know what that means.
@@MrCount84 No you don't. Stop fooling yourself kid, you know absolutely nothing about physical science. Attitude like that will get you know where. Be humble because there is always someone who is smarter than you and will expose you.
Count Hiram stop lying to yourself
Alex V Not really. In all fairness, the name is super straightforward. Hydrodynamics is the study of fluids and their dynamics. Magnetohydrodynamics is then the study of charged fluids and electromagnetic fields in said fluids. It's not particularly hard for a high schooler to figure out. There is no need to be an *asshole.*
A grad student told me how his professor or something along those lines met Jackson in a plane. Apparently this professor or what not told him "so Jackson, that was a pretty tough book you wrote" and soft spoken Jackson responded something along the lines of "I didn't think it was that bad"
physics profs and their exams "i didn't think it was that bad"
Wonder what hard would be for him.
@@rocketsoccer1 I did it in 1 hour so it shouldn't take you longer than 3
@@rocketsoccer1 : Same for us math profs. Thing is, you lay out exactly what the considerations are, and efficient ways to attack problems, and everybody shows they get it on the homework. And you even lift questions from OLD tests that you make available to your students, as well. And when 2/3 of them bomb, but 1/3 of them NAIL IT, you figure that the other 2/3 have holes in their foundation, didn't do their due diligence, or failed to ask questions.
Change the numbers in a public-domain test that you told them the next test was based on, and when people STILL mess it up, but some people ace it, you realize it was NOT that bad. If you listen to students about difficulty-level, the standard for an engineering degree would be mastery of 2 + 2 = 4. Luckily, there are always some teachers who believe in preserving standards and rigor. And weak students hate them. And we care. But not enough to change our ways.
@@harrymills2770 Good that some are still sticking to the approach. What has ended up happening here is that courses where any kind of standards and rigor are maintained end up having no attendances. Meanwhile the courses which amount to daycare are fully packed.
It can not work like this, it should be made very clear to students that obtaining a degree is a full time job. Otherwise I may as well ask a refund, daycare for 20 year olds is not what was advertised.
Who else watches these videos but isn't actually taking physics in university? Like I have no clue what's going on half the time but they're still so interesting
Astrid 😁
Yo I suck at physics but low key love these videos
lmao same im just a high school student junior but i watch his derivations of the green function and nod along and pretend i understand what hes doing
@@ChrisChoi123 yeah I just graduated high school and I'm not even taking physics in uni I only took physics 11
Same. I studied physics in undergrad but was far too dumb to continue. Switched over to economics in grad school. Easy peasy.
Sees video title.
"Jackson. It's gotta be Jackson."
Clicks video.
"Yep, it's Jackson."
Came here to say that! Lol
@@sabrinatigik6180 Same with me!
Lol same
Exactly my thought as well.
Yep...I was in graduate school 45 years ago.....and I knew it was Jackson !!!
I was talking with an old mentor of mine, who got his PhD in the 60s, about how strange it is to have finished all the core undergrad physics classes - like, I've actually learned all the fundamentals now! He laughed and told me I haven't /really/ taken all the fundamental physics classes until I take E&M with the Jackson book. I love that this experience literally transcends generations.
Me: "Imma become a great majored physicist"
Classical Electrodynamics: "I'm about to end this man's whole carreer"
Before it even took off
Expected a meme video, instead got a textbook unboxing video
10/10 nice meme
10/10 would meme again
My deep personal sense of ambition and love for knowledge: I WILL go to grad school for physics and i WILL make a difference
My mathematical ineptitude/jackson's Classical Electrodynamics: *no you ain't*
man I’m crying
You will go far with that attitude my friend. If you are interested in real physics(not that popular crap) it is a clue to yourself that your mind is capable. Work hard, stay hungry for knowledge, be persistent because you will fail many times, and just keep going. You will meet many great scientists across many fields. It truly is an orgasmic experience for any nerd out there.
When you try to redeem your iq points after losing them over the summer dumbness
@Cosmic Landscape we aall ca..we all can.
Only difference being mine's winter
One of my phisics teacher told me when you touch this book the day turns into night
😭💀
The package is vacuum-sealed to protect the innocent from toxic contamination.
Sees, Jackson sheds tears of nostalgia. Wonderful book. So much pain, I mean insight. Beautiful agony. Still have my copy, no longer understand it, :(
Plug away a little and you’ll have it down again!
Me: I'll be the greatest physicist of all time.
Jackson: Laughs in gradient divergence.
every time you say the intro i feel left out :(
@Diego Marra Then I’m an outlier
Didn't do method of images in undergrad - My prof said "We will skip method of images, because it's stupid."
beatleplayer1011 haha, I always found it to be so ridiculous ... but god damnit, it gave the right answer... apparently.
@@_Nibi Yeah, I think it is rather ridiculous but it is a way of getting the form of a Green's function? I don't know. I certainly wouldn't spend much time on it LOL
@@_Nibi Something something guaranteed by uniqueness theorem
If you have nice geometry it's really nice. It also works for waves, not just electrostatics. But maybe I just think it's nice because I do lighting research where treating a storm as charges above an infinite flat ground plane is a pretty good approximation.
Daniel Jensen that’s interesting!! I think having a physical example like that makes it a bit cooler :)
My friend in grad school (at Cornell) took his Jackson out and shot it after our grad E&M class!
Couple of years ago in undergrad, on electrodynamic theory course the professor casually mentioned it for good documentation when we were studying Maxwell's tensor so...I googled, I peaked....then I ran never to look back. Holy crap.
peek
See this is the kinda content I like. You should go through textbook chapters too and maybe do problems with us. Teach us as you go so we can in a way follow along in the textbook with you.
I graduated in physics, but did my masters and am currently pursuing my PhD in pure mathematics. This sort of laid-back "table-of-contents-of-a-book review" makes me nostalgic for studying physics again. It reminded me of Classical Theory of Fields by Landau & Lifshitz, which was one of my favourite books in undergrad.
In my world (applied EM), whenever someone asks whether we can do something analytically, the go-to answer if no one knows is "Maybe Jackson has it?" If not, then the answer is no, no you cannot.
PEOPLE ACTUALLY APPLY E&M?
@@elliottmiller3282 No cell coverage near you then boy?
What do you do out of curiosity?
Add the Landau Lifschitz set to your library!
me, an undergrad engineer, watching this:
thank god i can just hire a physicist
Venture capitalists laughs in background
I'm a 68-year-old chemist who was trained in physical-theoretical chemistry at Cornell. Over 40 years ago, when I was graduate student and postdoc, Jackson was infamous - even then.
I studied Jackson back in the early 1980s. The book was intimidating at first, but I really grew to like it. I often referred to it in my career when I needed to understand something about electromagnetic wave propagation and interaction with materials. (I was developing semiconductor devices for detecting visible light, infrared, x-rays/gamma-rays, etc.) I think it's "infamous" reputation is somewhat undeserved. However, the problems at the end of each chapter were often challenging. I remember writing out pages of math for each problem.
wow thats fascinating and great to know. How relevant is it in respect to today's technological atmosphere
Whole heartedly disagree. Jackson's infamous reputation is well deserved. The lack of examples and details on derivations throughout the book leaves the readers constantly confused and busy with attempting to find the steps inbetween. Unless you happen to be lucky to have an exceptional undergraduate career and a knowledgable professor teaching classical E&M you will mostly be lost throughout the course. As it stands, the Jackson book is terrible for self teaching and only shines when in the specific case previously mentioned.
The magnetohydrodynamics chapter is great if you've taken a course in fluid dynamics, you will already know like half the math. The thing about the book for me is that it's kind of a tedious read, but it's interesting because it does introduce a lot of techniques that are not common in undergrad EM courses. Also, the exercises are brutally long, so be aware of that.
the honors undergrads at our school (MIT) used Jackson in their sophomore year (which was taught by Kleppner). i think most students complain about it due to the tedious math involved in comparison to the ratio of actual physics. on the other hand, it did help me with my GR material due to this nature (with the PDE techniques and such). coming from a math background, i would argue that Baby Rudin is proportionally more difficult for its intended audience level than Jackson, if you have ever gone through that text. so i'd say it just gets a bad rap from the tedious math, that's all. nothing to be intimidated about imo
Hey - I'm in a similiar boat. Undergrad and my EM class goes all the way to the covariant formulism of Maxwells eq. Any tips? The only other EM class I've had was on Halliday/Purcell niveau.
@@davidm6624 if you've completed Purcell, you should be pretty much good to go since Purcell is fairly rigorous. i don't have too much advice for EM specifically as it's not a subject i struggled much with, but i would say that if you're having trouble, then the bottleneck is your math and not your physics skills as generally the physics should be self-contained in most advanced texts. for the topics i did have issues with, i found that cycling through different literature until i found the one that clicked to my perspective was what usually did it for me. so just remember that you are there to learn EM, not to study Jackson's text or any other book as a religious bible as your primary goal. if you don't like the book your class is using, find a different one!
@@sentralorigin yes, thanks. My tensors and pdes knowledge is def. not up to what it should be.
@@davidm6624 Write it all out and just guess like a good physicist or use GR notation and the tensor notation is so easy for Maxwell's eq. The exercise will pretty much learn you how to use tensor notation though.
Is this the same klepner as in klepner and kolenkow?
I found Classical Mechanics by Goldstein more terrifying. That brown leather cover with the red stripe -- strong memories: terror of learning.
It's a tough road as well!
I still have both Jackson and Goldstein.
im scared for grad level, i only used taylors book for now
Love Jackson's book. I had taken in my 5th year after using Lorrain and Corson in my 3rd yr EM. I used Jackson as my reference throughout my career as an RF engineer. I still have this book in my home library that I pull out and read time to time. I now ask myself why this was so challenging when I was a young student.
What is interesting is Jackson and Griffiths both are editors of the journal American Journal of Physics.
My professor started with Chapter 11-12 (which is in Gaussian units) and then went back to chapters 1,2,3,etc. Our course was also all in one semester. This was my first semester of grad school. I was not ready.
I have a feeling that you may get frustrated at times, but ultimately you'll probably do well, especially with the later chapters. I wish you the best!
“I’m just attaching meaning to things I know nothing about.”
That’s me whenever I walk into the lab for my research.
Griffiths was one of my favourite undergrad books - it's explained so beautifully, I got so excited whenever I opened up that book!
Before watching: It's Jackson.
About to finish the book - The text itself is tough sure, but those problems... hollllly shit. Smacks you over the head right away
What's even harder than Jackson?
@@Upgradezz I mean, I think Wald is harder, Birelle and Davies is harder, etc, but they're also more advanced than E+M, you know? So, for EM, Jackson is very difficult and it's mainly because of those problems.
@@beatleplayer1011 Jackson comparable to Purcell, or a much more difficult?
radwizard definitely much more difficult than Purcell - Jackson actually references Purcell as being the undergrad standard (in the preface) from which Jackson’s book is sorta built on
beatleplayer1011 they told us in my program that we use Purcell for EM because it behoves us to learn this for other books we will use in the future. If Jackson is worth it, my school most certainly uses it. Now Im going to order a copy if Jackson so I can practice for the future. Thanks Dude for the info.
I rather take a biology class then touch that book again.
I had Jackson as a professor in undergrad physics. He was smart (duh), fascinating, challenging, demanding, rigorous, yet compassionate, and fair. I remember he once marked an exam question wrong after I got the right answer. He said we could not use the equation we used because it had been derived from assumptions that did not apply to the question at hand... even though the equation always produced the correct answer. He would never accept weak reasoning. He was the department chair at the time and always had time for his students.
Cool! Nice to know that he was good man.
However, this is what "Classical Electrodynamics" feels like the first time!
ruclips.net/video/71Lft6EQh-Y/видео.html
Interesting. maybe it was at least partly due to the fact he was one of Weisskopf's students
1:31 When I try to start studying
lol immediately closing the book?
@@AndrewDotsonvideos Yh 😂
Jackson is over two decades old and there are now more modern treatises on Electromagnetic Theory. Jackson is a great reference, as are others, even Landau & Lifshitz, which is even older.
@Robert Schlesinger : which references would you recommend?
Make video on Landau books
I once read that Landau's mentorship was called "A school of puppies". I.e., he throwed his students into "the pond" of physics. If they got "to the shore", they could qualify for a career in physics. If they didn't - oh, well...
To be exact, they are Landau-Lifschitz books. Approximately 10 of them.
Thank you. Most underrated comment.
Those books are insane
Just checked it on wiki, Landau wrote the ten books while in prison, they cover a bunch of different fields. It's really f-ing insane, the man was a beast
Griffiths is a beautiful text that helps build insight. Jackson is all about building mathematical technique and humility.
Just finished my year of Jackson. My heart goes out to you.
Jaja, year? I know this is a comment from like 4 years ago, but I gotta vent somewhere. literally this is my first class of EM in undergrad school, my fourth year in college, one single semester. I kinda had an introduction with sears in my second year general physics course, but now it's the real thing. Our teacher really likes Jackson. like REALLLLY likes. So, in my first EM class, I have to read in parallel both Grifiths and Jackson. We do the hardest exercises from Griffith, and the easiest exercises from Jackson, all with Jackson level math.
My weeks are like,
day one, did five exercises from Griffith, I feel like I'm ready for everything
day two, did exercise 1.a from Jackson, feel like crying.
day three, tried doing 1.b, cried instead.
rest of the week, do an exercise cry then repeat.
bonus cry on weekends tho!
I used Jackson at undergrad... though I must say I didn’t cover half of what was in it. Anyone doing undergrad EM don’t be afraid of the book, you don’t need everything that’s in it and for me it was so much better than Griffith’s
Hope you enjoy turning in 25-page homework assignments! (Beginning most likely with chapter 3)
We finish up chapter two today, so that gives me plenty of time to jump off a building before chapter 3.
@@AndrewDotsonvideos excellent. With the techniques of Ch3, you'll be able to take the building's boundary conditions into account with spherical harmonics and bessel functions prior to flinging yourself off of it. The manner in which this is possible is trivial and is left to you as an exercise
This scares me, because I just finished an undergraduate E&M course where all of my assignments were 34 pages or longer, but I know I write more than my classmates... Grad school is gonna be something else!
It is a good book, I went through in EE E&M, good explanations, problems not so much lol. There's a rumor that a grad student asked Jackson himself about a particular problem. Jackson took one look at the problem and said 'I don't know how to solve that' and walked away.
Oh I remember Jackson E&M from my grad school days. I still remember the problem of solving and plotting the radiation field of a rotating square as well as all the electrostatic problems that took me hours to solve.
I see your board. Having fun with those loop corrections?
don't know if fun is the right word lol
somewhere on the table would be : QFT peskin 🤗
For your integral, researching Spence functions and Dilogarithms might be of some help. 't Hooft and Veltman also did quite a bit of work in this field. Hope it turns out fine. I had to calculate weak interaction one-loop vertices this semester and man, those can be tough as well. :)
You should really check Zangwill's book, it's like in-between Jackson and Griffiths, in all senses.
You're a hero.
How did you end up working integrals for Feynman diagrams before owning a copy of Jackson? By the time I even had a clue of how Feynman diagrams work, I had two copies of Jackson, one for my office, and one to keep inside the truck for when I got caught in a hurricane. Page 314 to 316 in Jackson changed my life. I saw the light panorama chart and from that point, I knew I had to work in the physics of air pollution. Jackson explained Mother Nature in a way I had never seen before or since. I'm lucky to have shared some emails with Professor Jackson once back in 2002, he was hilarious. I loved that man. His book is the common thread of all living physicists.
I‘d love to see you review the Landau lifshitz series of physics textbooks
I immediately knew this is Jackson. I didn't even do physics as a grad and I live on a whole different continent
Sitting here watching you while holding my copy of Jackson from 1964 ... Published in 1963 and has matching chapters from your new copy... For the quals, both written and oral, I sweated out anything sourced from Jackson... When you are a bodybuilder, everything starts with the bench press and Jackson was the equivalent in grad physics...
We used Landau/Lifshitz plus Jackson in graduate E&M. Funny thing is, I found my undergrad E&M course (with Griffiths) more challenging than my graduate E&M course. However, this was due to the different professors and their teaching styles rather than the inherent difficulty of the textbooks.
If system a is in equilibrium with system b and system b is in equilibrium with system c then don't talk about the zeroth law of thermodynamics
Jackson just has some really really involved computations, the truly terrifying textbooks are the ones in QFT where half the time you're not even sure the expressions you're working with exist at all
Try Misnor, Thorne and Wheeler.
My cousin finished Jackson and when he came to my house he gently placed the book on my desk and told me I need to struggle lie he has
Jackson is the standard EM book for undergrad Physics in Argentina. I'm currently weeping because of it.
R E A L L Y ?
That's nuts!
In the mid-90's, I took undergrad E&M. We used both Jackson and Griffiths. When I got to grad school E&M, I had already been pretty thoroughly through the book. Never heard it had this kind of reputation.
I was basically taught that if you want a first pass at a topic, use Griffiths. If you want a reference book that covers it all in detail, that's Jackson.
yo! Could you upload the second part on the derivation of the feynman path integral?
I have an exam on tuesday and your videos are very helpful.
OH NO, not another mention of Jackson book, time to book another therapy session.
I took The course on classical electrodynamics at CAL Berkeley in 1970 using this textbook and taught by Professor Jackson himself. I recall (hopefully accurately) him making this statement, "Every year I reread Landau's text on electromagnetics, and learn a little more..." And yes, I found his text anything but fun to read.
Nice anecdote.
I, too, have my copy of Jackson 2nd Edition. My prof was Dr. Yan Lwin, who had been one of Jackson’s students. I did grad school at age 45 and suffered through it!
I was expecting Landau-Lifshitz :p
Same lol
This semester I'm taking the E&M II course. And guess what is the reference book ? You're right ! It's the Jackson. I'm already crying it is so hard.
Here I am struggling with high school electrostatic problems😭 and you have started Jackson.
jackson experience be like:
3 undegrad lectures in half a page.
the equation is: this
the time-averaged solution is: this
how one leads to the other is trivial.
I came from the tensor calculus videos and I just want to say thank you very much for posting those videos here, we really appreciate it.
0:55 I thought it's "Methods of Theoretical Physics" by Morse & Feshbach and already wondered why the package is so slim.
Jackson is the only book I've read that actively talked down to me.
T H 😂😂😂
The moment when your professor in undergrad thermodynamics sends you to read the Jackson e&m book to learn how magnetic effects of solids depend on thermodynamic variables
The classical self-energy of point particles is a classic old problem. As old as the original idea of the column potential/force. Yes the Jackson problems were the most difficult. It was 30 years ago but I think it was choosing the appropriate coordinates and the necessary coordinate transformations to solve for systems of point particles and various conducting and non conduction curvilinear objects.
Cries of the souls of the Grad students trapped inside. O the horror.
My initial point of view, you MUST understand Griffith’s book or similar to its level very well before even touch Jackson’s book
I think it's more of a maths issue than physics issue. So, if you know the maths, and have familiarity with E&M, you should be fine.
Ryan Perrin what maths is necessary for Jackson ? It seems like a bunch of vector calc and pde’s, are there more prerequisites too?
Niece is crying, I put absolute value bars around her... To make her feel positive..... surprisingly it didn't work
You didn't cover waveguides in undergraduate E&M? I was so glad I did, because within a year of graduating I was working in satellite communications where waveguides are used.
Our U/G E&M text was Jordan and Balmain's "Electromagnetic Waves and Radiating Systems", 2nd Edition. I still have it, and I still feel a slight tinge of panic when I take it off the bookshelf.
I spent entire weekends solving homework problems from Jackson’s book. It was indeed a rite if passage in my first year of graduate school. I later had a course in atomic physics taught by Jackson. His lectures were incredibly organized so that the when bell rang , he had just completed the lecture, leaving all the boards completely with neatly written equations.
I was by no means the strongest E&M student, but I'm really surprised by how hard everyone seems to find wave guides. I had been struggling through most of my grad classes, but wave guides and special relativity just made perfect sense to me. It was things like Green's functions and other integrals that I struggled with.
Seems similar to how the Battin book is for orbital mechanics. The first chapter is all about hypergeometric functions and gets more fun from there.
As an electrical engineer, electromagnetics kicked my ass at first. I thought I understood the concepts, but on the first (infamous) exam where we had to apply Gauss' law to spheres with holes and all that stuff, I totally screwed up. Later on in college though I took two more engineering electromagnetics classes (Smith Charts, RF principles, wave guides, TE and TM propagation modes, total internal reflection, cavity radiation, noise, etc) and an antenna course. Electromagnetics is one of those subjects where the more you read about it, the more you realize how little you know. There are just so many different scenarios and properties of EM waves. Example? look up Zenneck waves,
I know what it will be already. Jackson E&M!!!! :D. I'll be seeing it next year. Back in undergrad we used an obscure Dover text and on my own I worked through Corson and Lorraine which is Excellent. (I need to do that again)
I was a grad student in the late 80's and this book was infamous then. There is something about E&M that lends itself to grad student torture.
So you're telling me you've a 72 in 1 integral? That sounds like a better deal than anything at the supermarket.
I took E&M with Francis Low (who basically pulled his whole classes out from his memory! at 70!). Later on, his class notes became his book. I actually enjoyed the classes, and we also used Jackson's as a reference book too. For me J's book still is THE reference for E&M.
I'm going to have to commend you for your colloquial and human faceplate you are bringing to the domain of discourse. I'm just some 30 something old black dude from Detroit that is trying to get a sense of what is going to be expected of me as I try to make my cnc warehouse job into my own combinatorial disciplined binary....I have been working on first order logic and the nomenclature that is at minimum needed for the abstraction of what I need to be a better student and provide a better educational environment for my kids. You just don't know how much you have helped me out with the void internal information exchange that you provided. I have a bit more confidence that I am capable of translating my skillset into an actual real measured education not bound to being a button pusher in a dimly lit warehouse. I saw the canned cycles coordinates on my g&m code display and little did I know that I was observing a abellian group matrix.....I have never seen a matrix or even had a use for it.....now I have been using a gaussian manifold and a tesseract to isolate lie groups from their cardinal hierarchical identity to perturb modular components and develop a min/max parameter for absolute production tolerances and optimize my own skillset. The induction regression system of engineering endgame backwards to my own origin is finally getting me ahead and I can now see that the whole process of higher education has a lot to do with the individuals abilities to make a fixed point for progressive results while continuing to make floating point questions that all seem to have a field discipline gradient that is accessible to give a better abstract perspective and embed your personal ability to get a better understanding of what you're looking at and how to do rigorous learning techniques. Whew.....thank you 100% my dude
well, after reading a lot of undergraduate text and getting taught about basic S-L problems and orthogonal function expansion as well as green's function, I finally got my own copy of Jackson
sadly the international version is like 100 pages shorter and misses a bit of cool stuffs
the book is actually a death notebook maintained by JD himself, graduate students all arpund the world who refers to this book gets automatically mentioned in the original book and every midnight the further pages tranforms into a mystical language by the screams of the previous students begging grad students not to fall into the trap so they make it less readable to save our lives😔😔
I took Jackson E&M with someone whose PhD adviser's PhD adviser was Jackson. I took this class (part 2, so radiation) at the same time, and on the same day of the week, as quantum mechanics and general relativity. All first year grad school, three years ago. That quarter was a total blur.
Jackson talks about the stress tensor way back in chapter 6. I didn't remember it at all until we did a podcast on it -- probably because we didn't have any problems on it. He even gets into the problems with defining it, which I thought was really cool. Still, I don't think Jackson really helps you understand it.
Schwartz's Principles of Electrodynamics, however, uses it a lot so you do get a good idea about how to apply it there.
So much nostalgia at 2:26. I remember writing those equations down, memorizing them... *sigh* 😂😂
Jackson was a nightmare, by far the longest equations I've written were from grad level E&M.
The Jackson stands in my bookshelf for 20+ years but I hardly ever had a look into it. In fact, I rather used the Philippow, a book for Engineers. Still I got a PhD in Physics.
Not sure if you've heard of it but the textbook that my school used for the first E&M course is Electricity and Magnetism by Purcell. It was a really brutal introduction to E&M if I have to say so myself.. thankfully we are using Griffiths next time around. But man after getting through that made me feel that I can do any course.
*waiting impatiently for the book reveal!
*"Jackson E&M"
* *Immediate screeching*
I love all Griffiths books it's easy to understand and has a good ideas to learn about any thing in physics
I literally gasped when I saw the title on the spine.
Man, I really miss the days when I actually knew some of this stuff. Oh well, I just downloaded the PDF of the third edition of the Jackson book for free. Pretty daunting stuff, but I can at least dream about reading it and understanding it!