Customer Reviews

Classical Dynamics of Particles and Systems

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(7)

 

 

I took a mechanics course 9 years ago with an earlier edition, finished undergrad and left the study of physics. Recently I bought a new edition and I have just finished self studying this book and I felt that it's quite excellent. The problems are challenging but that is precisely what I expected. I think it really deserves 4 stars but I gave it 5 because the average ratings given by other reviewers is too low. I would like to go through the positives and negatives of this text. However keep in mind that the negatives of this text are apparent pretty much in every physics text.

Positives: 1) The text is easy to understand, the problems follow from the text 2) Answers to even numbers excercises in the back of text. This is absolutely crucial if you are self studying without an instructor. 3) Problems are random in their difficulty and individually comprehensive in their review of the chapter.
4) The Mathematics is pretty elementary, with a solid understanding of Calculus and differential equations you should be properly equipped to handle the entire text.

Negatives: 1) There are little to no difficult problems involving Newtonian formalism (Forces). Energy and momentum is predominantly used, for good reason, but it does not hurt to go back to the more rigorous approach of Forces for some difficult problems.

2) It would be nice to have a chapter dedicated to cyclic coordinates, Poisson Brackets and Canonical Transformations.

3)Impulses(chap 9) are dealt with in Integral form as opposed to differential form of the time change in momenta. The latter is much more intuitive and useful for solving problems.

4)Wider use in problems and examples of Poisson's equation for gravity.

5) Relativity should be introduced much earlier in the text. This is one of the formalisms of every undergraduate textbook in physics which I do not understand. Relativity always gets pushed back towards the end of textbooks. There is nothing particularly difficult about the subject that demands that it get treated in such a fashion. As opposed to the three chapters prior (dynamics of rigid bodies, coupled oscillations and waves) which are much more demanding. Furthermore it would be useful for students taking E&M at the same time as Mechanics to have had some experience with 4 vectors before dealing with Maxwell's equations.

I came to this course after taking honors freshman physics at Yale with An Intro to Mechanics by Kleppner and Kolenkow. And, unfortunately, this book just is not as good. The mathematical derivations are often tedious and uninsightful, a good description as well for many of the problems. In addition, many of the problems, particularly the tougher ones, are already worked out in the text. For me, the text is a combination of mediocre treatment of material with exceptionally poor problems. The problems in this text are, in general, easier than those in K&K, but they often take three times as long to write out. Many of them are exercises in 10th grade algebra, or 12th grade calculus (read: horrible integrals and looong expressions to simplify). What is required is not insight, but exceptional care at not making simple errors and patience for long derivations of often obvious results. For a physics major, this book just seems like a colossal waste of time and money. If you want reinforcement of concepts, turn to Feynman in his lectures. For insightful and challenging mechanics (though Hamiltonian and Lagrangian dynamics are missing), Kleppner and Kolenkow is a far better text.

Whether knowingly or unknowingly, most of the physics text reviews that I have read may be divided into two categories:

- those who loved or hated the book because it was not written to teach physics through a conceptual framework.

- those who loved or hated the book because it was not written to teach physics through the development of skills.

Then the reviews may be divided again into two categories:

- those who loved or hated the book because it conveyed an exclusively classic and/or historical treatment of physics.

- those who loved or hated the book because it conveyed a modern treatments of physics.

Therefore, I will write my review within the same framework that everyone else seems to...

I loved this book because it was written to teach physics through the development of SKILLS; I loved this book because it did so through a CLASSIC TREATMENT of physics.

Now I will explain why...

The study of physics is FAR MORE than an extraction of information from a book, the way that, say, reading an encyclopedia entry is. The study of physics, rather, is a MENTAL DISCIPLINE, that takes 10,000 hours of intensive mental effort just to become a 'fairly skilled beginner', and at least half a lifetime of intensive mental effort to become an expert in just one, very small, sub-sub-field. It is a journey in which one must tavel the same mental footsteps that the great physicists of the past did before one is ready to travel the new and original mental footsteps of their own research activity. Along the way, one must start with easy treatments, must progress through the intermediate treatments, and must one day tackle the tremendously difficult advanced treatments, of every sub-field of study. Early in the study of a new stage of such a sub-field, one must obtain a solid understanding of every concept, and after this, they must move on from mere concepts, and must develop an exceptional skill set. And one day, if one has been utterly dedicated and unwavering, and if one has worked harder than they ever thought would be necessary when they stood at the beginning of the road... one WILL find that they have reached a higher realm.

I am utterly convinced that this book is the ideal written work that one should study at the time and place in the journey that it is usually encountered on this road.

This is a very solid introduction to classical mechanics. Starting from a simple review of Newtonian Mechanics, it covers many of the more advanced topics which would become useful in future studies: Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics, rigid body problems, center of mass formulations, vibrations and waves, central force problems including planetary motions, and a little introduction to special relativity. The general coverage is solid, and the book is easy to follow. In particular, the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian sections are probably the easist to read amongst alternatives. However, it does suffer from a few things: (a) pages of detailed calculations which are usually not particularly elegant, or illuminating, I have seen some of the problems get much more elegant mathematical treatment elsewhere, (b) some of the links with other branches of physics could be a little more illuminating, such as the Hamiltonian section could mention some applications in optics which will enhance understanding. Overall, a good book to learn classical mechanics from.

I really like this book a lot. I never went to class for both quarters of my upper-division undergraduate mechanics class, and instead read Thornton and Marion religiously. I've heard friends express their dislike for it, but I think it is very clear and provides excellent perspective and insight. It is very mathematically rigorous, which I appreciate but others may not. The proofs given are typically very readable, although I often skipped over the sort of "obvious" things that the book shows in exquisite detail. Lots of great sections and topics, much interesting material covered, in addition to the basics. Highly recommended.

People who read this book carefully will find that many of the examples in the book contain flawed reasoning. The sloppy logic often leads one to understand certain concepts in a wrong way. The book does have lots of long-winded mathematical derivations, but they don't really add to the reader's physical insight. (eg. in chapter 11, some simple linear algebra that can be done in three lines are instead derived in pages of summations and index swap)
This book is a disgrace to the teaching of physics. Its tedious, sometimes illegitimate algebra spoils the elegance of classical mechanics. Compare it with Landau, and you will see the point.

I use this text in my spring sophomore-level mechanics class. There are no perfect texts for this level, but this is the best one out there. The book does assume that you either have a solid base of mathematics or are willing to learn during the course. That's typical in a physics class; you learn mathematics while learning physics, and so its a good introduction to the style of more advanced physics classes. While the chapter on nonlinearity doesn't fit well with the other chapters, and I wish Lagrangian's were moved later in the text, its still a better choice then most other texts for most students. Less mathematically prepared students could use Taylor's text, for example, and more mathematically prepared students should use Goldstein and landau, but this book aims at the middle of lower division physics majors.

My professor used this book for my classical mechanics course in the semester that just ended.

My attitudes towards the book change dramatically during the semester.

I read the first few chapters in the first couple of weeks, finding them not much different from what I have already learnt in my introductory mechanics course. And the texts are not impressive, at least compare to Griffith's books. Then I decided to abandon the book and embrace the lecture notes by my professor.

We started with Ch 6 calculus of variation, then Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics, these are something new, but pretty easy to follow. Then Chp 12, coupled oscillation and normal modes, again, pretty simple, because for me they are no different from solving systems of linear ODE(I learnt ODE myself and took a course formally). However, the content became challenging immediately when we touched rigid body, I was much confused by the fixed and the body coordinate appearing simultaneously.(previously we dealt with rotational frame, but we that's way simpler) My professor used an intuitive and inductive approach,i.e. he calculated every component of the angualar momentum or rearrange terms in rotational energy EXPLICITLY, to invoke the idea of inertia tensor and principal axes. That was crystally clear, but you are simply lost in a bunch of terms. Though finally, he came to the matrix representation(which is actually tensor). But to me, there was obviously a chain missing. I would feel it strange if I could not derive every formula myself from the very basic starting point!(I also did these for EM and finally ended up reciting many of the vector identities).But if the drivation is not simple enough, I would not be able to master it at all!

Then I turned to M&T's book. I was so delighted to find that their derivation for the inertia tensor is much more compact using index notation. I could grasp, memorize and finally internalize the whole logic by easily following these shorter form of derivation. The missing chain was fixed and I began to appreciate the value of the book.

Looking back, the book does have the problems with its end-chapter questions, which are not intuitive, and do not contain much "physics". These can be a great hurdle for those who learn the basic concept by working on problems.

But the mathematical rigorosity in the book is without doubt its greatest advantage which render the book link well with more advanced graduate textbook such as Classical Mechanics by Goldstein. University students should not expect to master something new immediately. Reading the text several times with some intervals in between helps with understanding.

To summarize my review, I would suggest that the author add a little humour in the writing, which is otherwise boring for many. More interesting problems should be come up with and more physical insights are expected.

This book really isn't as bad as everyone thinks it is. Personally, I would cover the chapters in a different order than the book, treating the Lagrangian formation first. Maybe that's what you're supposed to do anyways, since the first couple of chapters are intended to be review. Some of the exercises in this book are just silly and expect to use at least 5 sheets of paper to get through the inane calculations and algebra. For more advanced readers, I would recommend Landau instead, but all together not too bad.

I used this book for Classical Mechanics and Classical Dynamics, and was a complete waste of time and money, the explanation of the topics is very superficial, and the mathematics are very poorly. However, the book is well organized, because clearly it develop a line of thought that an undergraduated student can follow, nonetheless the develop of this line of thought is a real dissaster. In conclusion, please look for another book, don't buy this piece of sh... Sorry, but I'm really dissapointed with this book. I had to buy another five books to complete what at last is the real classical dynamics.

P.S.: Beg your pardon if there is any grammar error, I'm not a native English Speaker.