What is Reddit's opinion of Physical Chemistry: A Molecular Approach?

From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

This is the book that was used in my physical chemistry class. I enjoyed it quite a bit as it is written very well and the practice problems help quite a bit. The book is extremely thorough when going through all of the derivations of equations and give pretty good logical explanations while going through the problems as long as you understand how the algebra and calculus works. The biggest con with it however is that the figures which go along with some of the book can be quite difficult to understand the first time you are looking at them. The book can also be quite dry at times. Because of this, I had also picked up the Atkins book because I found it used for cheap on amazon. The Atkins book is a bit less dry and the figures are way more pleasant to look at, however it seems to be a little less in depth than the McQuarrie book.

No matter which book you choose to go with just be aware that the class can be extremely difficult for people and the most important thing is to make sure you are putting a lot of time into the class. It might be worthwhile to find a decent calculus review and to go through it before taking the class if you feel at all lacking in that department. If you do this you will succeed and possibly even really enjoy the class. I was incredibly nervous going in to the class but it turned out to be one of my favorite classes I took my entire undergrad.

Quantum chemistry is part of physical chemistry. In fact, this textbook starts off with quantum and then progresses to statistical mechanics/thermo. Some schools put quantum and stat mech/thermo together as part of a year-long physical chemistry sequence:

Physical Chemistry 1 - Statistical Mechanics/Thermodynamics

Physical Chemistry 2 - Quantum Chemistry

Other schools, like yours, have a single physical chemistry course and a separate "Quantum Chemistry" course.

At my school, we had the year-long physical chemistry sequence. "Quantum chemistry" is a senior elective for chemistry majors specializing in physical chemistry, where they learn the intense math theory about computational chemistry calculations (Hartree-Fock, DFT) and use software like Gaussian to simulate chemical processes at the molecular level. It's research-y stuff.

There are a few heavily referred to texts for physical chemistry/quantum.

• Physical Chemistry by Mcquarrie and Simon (https://www.amazon.com/Physical-Chemistry-Molecular-Donald-McQuarrie/dp/0935702997) (Aka the "Big red bible" of physical/quantum chemistry.)
• Quantum Chemistry by Levine
• Physical Chemistry by Atkins
• Quantum Chemistry by Mcquarrie

I have never seen a physical chemistry/quantum chemistry class taught at the university level without one of these books. At one point they split the Physical chemistry by Mcquarrie and simon into two different books, but they lost a few chapters on kinetics along the way. That's the book I would suggest getting first as it goes through physical chemistry, THEN the introduction to quantum. Then you can read the same author's quantum chemistry book.

It's been a while, but it's worth noting that quantum mechanics is generally taught using two different methods of notation. The first is Dirac notation (or Bra Ket notation), and I forget the other one. They SEEM completely different, but they solve the same problems using similar math. I prefer the other one, I just can't seem to remember the name right now. Operators maybe?

Basically it was the same topic approached by two equally smart scientists from different views, so they teach it differently.

I always liked Physical Chemistry: A Molecular Approach.

But it sort of depend on what you're looking to get out of it. Any particular part of p-chem that you wanted to focus on? (Stat mech, thermo, quantum, ect.?)

Have you had any physics? It's normally required for a P-Chem class. Perhaps starting with physics would help you with the regular p-chem textbooks? The P-Chem textbook I see recommended the most here is probably this one, but it isn't really biology based.

Hi, I'm actually a Chemist major who wants to understand Quantum Mechanics better. I studied this one in my senior year: http://www.amazon.com/Physical-Chemistry-A-Molecular-Approach/dp/0935702997. If I want to get more intensive on it, which one should I go for?

You'll probably be all set after Diff Eq's though Linear Algebra might be helpful too. My FAVORITE book on quantum chemistry is McQuarrie and Simon's Physical Chemistry: A Molecular Approach

http://www.amazon.com/Physical-Chemistry-A-Molecular-Approach/dp/0935702997

It is a massive tome but it is essential for anyone interested in physical chemistry. It is the most clear and thorough reference I have ever found and most awesomely (and most relevant to your question), it includes mini-chapters throughout that give you a primer on the math you will need best to understand the next section.

Take home exam is a week long. This professor is notorious for writing questions that simply cannot be solved (not because its too hard, there simply is no solution to it). And its not the only PChem test I have next week. (Sometimes I wonder if I'm suicidal or masochistic). But yea, McQuarrie breaks everything down to the point where he assumes you have only a decent math/chemistry/physics background and things are explained quite well. It's a great buy if you want to actually learn the stuff and its cheaper than most textbooks. Amazon listing

Wrong book, bot. Thou doth not knoweth the deep magicks.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0935702997/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_glt_fabc_GC0HTRQM31HCVH4KJYYS

Do you have this book? We called it the red bible, and I used for both undergrad and grad thermo/quantum courses.

Is this the book you are talking about?

https://www.amazon.com/Physical-Chemistry-Molecular-Donald-McQuarrie/dp/0935702997

I can't speak for it personally, but the Pchem courses at the University of Illinois usually use this book: http://www.amazon.com/Physical-Chemistry-Molecular-Donald-McQuarrie/dp/0935702997/ref=pd_sim_b_45

The class was called In depth Physical Chemistry 2, we did the first 6 weeks of the lab with additional math specifically for the class. Linear and matrix algebra stuff, PDEs mainly for Schrodinger Equation, Laplace, stuff like that. It was Quantum, then we did 4 weeks of statistical mechanics, mainly related to gases(rms and such). We covered up to group theory stuff, did the variation theorem for determining energy.

The degree is ACS Materials Chemistry if you want to look it up.

My tutor was a PhD Computational Physics student, he said my material was a combination of his Quantum mechanics classes and modern physics classes.

My textbook was "Physical Chemistry, A Molecular Approach" By McQuarrie and Simon. https://www.amazon.com/Physical-Chemistry-Molecular-Donald-McQuarrie/dp/0935702997/ref=sr_1_1?crid=104CZMDKGH520&keywords=physical+chemistry+a+molecular+approach&qid=1571241383&sprefix=physical+chemistry+a+mol%2Caps%2C128&sr=8-1

> The bra-ket notation is literally just a way of notating linear algebra. The math doesn't change because of how you write it down.

You've obviously never taken a quantum mechanics class. It's taught as one or the other. I'm not arguing it's different, hence why I said the bra-ket "notation". It's simply the way chemists and physicists prefer to represent the schrodinger equation because it makes their math look better for their most commonly used applications.

I present to you, a perfect example.

This here is a book generally used by chemists when being taught quantum mechanics.

https://www.amazon.com/Physical-Chemistry-Molecular-Donald-McQuarrie/dp/0935702997

And now here is a book generally used by physicists when being taught the same thing.

https://www.amazon.com/Principles-Quantum-Mechanics-R-Shankar-ebook/dp/B000SEIXA2

Do you see how one book works almost exclusively in the linear algebra space while the other works almost exclusively using bra-ket notation? It's a choice, made by professors. Yes, you can learn both, it's not hard. This is why I know you've never taken a quantum mechanics class because this is made extraordinarily clear to everybody in the class. "These two things teach you the same stuff but in different ways. We choose to use this way."

> As for physical chemistry defining how everything works, how much particle physics do you do as a physical chemist?

Well considering I'm a spectroscopist, and a mechanist, quite a bit actually. And sure, I'm sure particle theory absolutely can explain pretty much everything.... in the longest most roundabout way possible. I wasn't aware, however, that the interactions of quarks (other than the electron....) came into play for the typical, everyday chemical reactions that occur constantly. In fact, are there not very few reactions that humans can achieve that actually have enough energy to split a proton or neutron into their constituent parts? I'm pretty sure that once the big bang cooled down everything pretty much settled into the subatomic particles we know and love today. So I mean, unless you plan on replicating the types of heat seen in the big bang.... that level of detail is... well... superfluous. Sure, it MAY be useful in SOME nuclear reactions, but even then, not always. If particle theory explained everything, why is it not used to explain everything? Go on.... explain. I'm waiting.

Also I find it funny that you assume that we didn't learn about subatomic particles smaller than the proton and the neutron. We simply know that they aren't really that useful for most normal situations. In theory? Sure. In reality? No. We're chemists, not theorists. We get shit done.

> Edit: it's also worth noting that bra-ket notation is typically introduced at the undergraduate level of quantum mechanics.

Congratulations! You've discovered the meaning of the word "introduced!"