Statistical Mechanics

Rating:
Summary: Not standard, Not so bad
Review: As repeated by reviewers below, this is NOT STANDARD textbook on statistical mechanics because it stresses the kinetic theory. If reader would like to learn the equilibrium theory, this book might be embarassing. However, this book is recommended to anyone who is interested in "unusual" viewpoint. I prefer Huang to other numerous too standard textbooks. But I am a little disappointed that some interesting topics are removed in the new edition, such as the Chapman-Enskog method.

Now, it is NOT SO BAD.

Rating:
Summary: One approach.
Review: Few books on Statistical Mechanics present a treatment with a grounding in the Boltzmann Transport Equation. It is more usual the case that a statistical approach is adopted, in which the canonical (or other) ensemble is arrived, and subsequent results somehow refer back to the the ensembles. Huang seems to wish to proceed from a strongly microscopic and kinetic point of view. There must be great strength in his approach, as statistical phenomena, in reality, is built up from this semi-classical sort of physics. If you like kinetic theory, then buy it. However, for those of us who find more comfort in relating to a more statistical approach, this book is fearsomely unreadable.

But do read it for a description of the Boltzmann Transport equation.

Rating:
Summary: Least favorite of all I've seen
Review: Huang approaches the subject as a series of proofs: he does not make physical arguments, and his writing is wooden. Instructors--avoid this book!

Some have said that this book approaches stat mech from the refreshing view of kinetic theory. But it leaves out the Fokker-Planck and Langevin approaches, by which the Boltzmann equation is usually solved. Anyone interested in this approach would be *far* more rewarded by Landau's Physical Kinetics.

Anyone interested in Gibbs theory should consult Landau or Sommerfeld.

Anyone who wants good problems (and real applications) would be better served by the canonical McQuarrie.

Anyone who wants a feel for what the subject *actually now is* should see Kadanoff or Chandler. Actually I think allowing students to leave stat mech without seeing the monte carlo algorithm or solving a stochastic equation is a crime.

Rating:
Summary: Great book
Review: I am appaled and even outraged to read so many negative criticisms of this fine book. If it is included in many graduate courses in statistical mechanics is because the experts believe it is good. I share this belief and many (many!) of my colleages think also do. Admitedly, it is a hard book and not so good for self study, but it is great as a companion to an advanced statistical mechanics course, or for teachers. Ah, the log(N!) thing (Stirling's approximation ) is quite obviously a typo, and eq. (4.39) has a wrong ! as is trivial to check. Errata like this are really hard to avoid, I have found them in many other books, but this one is not of the worst (e.g. Tinkham's Superconductivity was much worse).

Rating:
Summary: Here is the tutor
Review: I have in my hands the second edition of "Statistical mechanics" by Kerson Huang. In page 82 there is a funny formula, which says "log n! = n log n - 1", and I will assume that this is what all the previous reviewers have been talking about. Now, in the first place, does anybody really think that Kerson would spend ink writing that "-1", thinking that somehow it improved his approximation? No way! It must be a typo. I believe that no one who writes a book on stat mech can look at this funny formula without a shudder, or maybe an urge to laugh. Second, there is no mistake in the derivation that appears in page 82 and leads to the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. The Stirling approximation is used to transform log N! - log n1! - log n2! - log n3! - .... into N log N - n1 log n1 - n2 log n2 - n3 log n3.... (I apologize for my cumbersome typography) Here is the way to do it. Use the correct form of the approximation, "log n! = n log n - n" , and remember that "n1 + n2 + n3...= N". Voila! And finally, my opinion regarding the book. Well, it seems interesting to me. It is indeed quite kinetic, as another reviewer said. But I am afraid that I haven't finished the book yet, so I'd better end my review here.

Rating:
Summary: not bad but lost direct view point
Review: i think you sluold have a strong background about the history of
statistical mechanics,and have a sense (or taste) of abality to
know what or why this book wanna to do, then Kerson's book is not bad

Rating:
Summary: An adequate Stat. Mech. book
Review: I would suggest that the previous reviewer get him/herself a tutor. (The formula Huang uses, log n! = n log n - 1, is correct for large numbers.) Statisticam Mechanics is a notoriously hard subject to present lucidly and clearly. Huang does a fairly good job. I was a little disappointed with his treatment of critical phenomena at the end of the book; for a much better and more comprehensive treatment, read Nigel Goldenfeld's "Lectures on phase transitions and the renormalization group".

Rating:
Summary: Unreadable
Review: The reviewer below who said that this book pursues primarily a kinetic theory - Boltzmann Transport Equation approach, got it right. It really is a fearsome, and by and large, pointless read. Our professor used this book in our stat. mech. class back in 1992. He also used Mahan's Many Particle Physics book in our solid state course and de Genne's Superconductivity text in our superconductor course, so that gives you an idea of what kind of person likes Huang. Most students I've talked to feel that this text is the worst sort of student pain. The pain you feel when after exerting colossal effort trying to understand, you realize at the end of the semester that you didn't learn anything, and that you could have, if only the instructor had chosen one of any number of better books. I am completely mystified as to why and how this book has reached a 3rd edition. Perhaps there are too many physics professors out there who don't care about pedagogy.

Rating:
Summary: Ugh.
Review: We are using Huang in Physics 262 (Statistical Physics). The whole class is utterly lost. The derivation of the Boltzmann transport equation is just painful. The derivation of the Boltzmann distribution is even more painful. The way I know something is wrong with this book: we all read the chapter quite a few times and then looked at the homework problems at the back of the chapter, which are standard enough, and had NO CLUE how to approach them. Now, I am guessing that all fifty or so of us are reasonably intelligent, so the problem must not be with us....