>>13519096>There is no derivation because it's a postulateThere IS a derivation, it's not particularly advanced, and furthermore, even if it's a postulate, Schrodinger had to come up with it somehow, so at the very least discuss some of the history, the context of the problem, etc, and how Schrodinger arrived at his result. Don't just barf an equation on the page and tack on a bunch of problems. Griffith's treatment reduces QM to nothing more than solving a bunch of dressed-up calculus problems. You don't come away knowing anything more than you came in with.
On top of that, Griffiths relegates actually important parts of QM (like Bell's inequality) to the appendix. And it's been a while but I don't recall any discussion of Stern-Gerlach apparatuses, double-slit experiments, and so on (Feynman spends multiple chapters on these things). Surely they're mentioned somewhere but they don't get much attention.
Back onto the subject of Morin, I just downloaded a copy to remind myself of the book again. It's totally, utterly inappropriate as an introduction to mechanics. Even if you've already had mechanics, it's still really bad. It skims over a tiny bit of theory, does a problem or two that illustrates something sort of flashy, then spends the rest of its content on lists of problems. Compare Morin to something like Kleppner and Kolenkow, which has DETAILED explanations, examples, discussions, applications, and so on. Even K&K is not perfect, but between the two there's absolutely no comparison. If you're on a desert island and it's the only physics book you have I suppose it's better than nothing, but it's still a terrible book for learning classical mechanics.
