For the Aspiring Theoretical Physicist

[Macavity]

From a number of threads / posts recently, I was moved to search for opinions on the nature of,

and qualifications for, being a "Theoretical Physicist".

The following seemed fun:

A theoretical physics FAQ

I see Gerard 't Hooft has waxed-eloquent on the subject too:

Gerard ’t Hooft, Theoretical Physics as a Challenge

P.S. As a bog-standard (hardware-orientated!) ex-Particle Physicist, I remained ever (grudgingly?) in awe of Theoreticians. LOL. But am also reminded that Brian Cox only scored a "grade D" Math(s) A-Level. At least I had the decency to get a "grade C"...

[NeutrinoWave]

Did all of them except

I never did any of the following

QFT\QFD

QCD

Superstring Theory

so feel a bit left out, as that leaves a major hole that needs patching up

You can never cover everything can you?

[Macavity]

Just bought myself a copy of:

Introduction to Elementary Particles: Amazon.co.uk: David Griffiths: Books

Who knows? A tad late here, but...

Might seem amazing now, but the only (mid-70s) Ph.D textbook, I ever had, is now reviewed as a "One Star" on Amazon - Described as the "worst textbook ever"(!) by a couple of reviewers...

Heck, with better guidance, I could've been the proto Brain Corks...

[George Jones]

Just bought myself a copy of:

Introduction to Elementary Particles: Amazon.co.uk: David Griffiths: Books

Who knows? A tad late here, but...

Excellent book! I own both the first and second editions. It might be fun to skip to the end and read chapter 12 first (or maybe chapters 11 and 12)!

[Macavity]

It might be fun to skip to the end and read chapter 12 first (or maybe chapters 11 and 12)!

Well, I sneaked a preview. But indeed, an extraordinary book. In Ch.1/2, after a "historical perspective", and even before the math(s) begins, one can draw Feynman diagrams (for QED, Weak and Strong processes) - Make experimental predictions too! Even contemplate Kobayashi-Maskawa, OZI supression and GUTs.

I sense, problems with past texts - Where confidence was cumulatively eroded by not knowing the EXACT meaning of (mostly mathematical) terms, is well addressed. I found myself laughing out loud (in revelation) a couple of times! Who knows, I may yet know the difference between covariancy and contravariancy...

[Space Bat]

A lot of science of this nature is purely on what is privy and allowed to the masses