Teoretisk fysiks kursutväderingar


Resultat av: Statistical mechanics for non-equilibrium systems, SI2520, vt 2010

Status: Avslutad
Publicerad under: 2010-06-15 - 2010-06-24
Antal svar: 5
Procent av kursdeltagarna som svarat: 62%
Kontaktperson: Jack Lidmar

What is your overall impression of the course?

5 svarande

Very positive3 60%
Positive0 0%
Neutral2 40%
Negative0 0%
Very negative0 0%

- I learned a lot and the subject matter seemed to agree with other non-equilibrium statistical mechanics courses I looked at. I am happy with what I learned and it seems to have a lot of applications in other areas that (I believe) will be beneficial to me in the future (e.g. stochastic differential equations, etc). (Very positive)

How difficult did you find the course?

5 svarande

Very difficult0 0%
Difficult3 60%
Average2 40%
Easy0 0%
Very easy0 0%

- The overall level of the course was appropriate for a ~PhD level course. It required for me some review of complex analysis towards the end of the course. Also, I can admit here that I totally don't understand the functional integral approach that was discussed. This level of physics course should be difficult. (Difficult)

How would you rate the style of the lectures?

5 svarande

Far too sketchy0 0%
Sketchy1 20%
Neutral4 80%
Detailed0 0%
Far too detailed0 0%

- I think the time was used well, a lot of examples were given. (Neutral)

Was the teacher good at explaining things?

5 svarande

Very good1 20%
Good2 40%
Average2 40%
Bad0 0%
Very bad0 0%

- One very beneficial thing about Jack is that he is very willing and able to talk about problems and questions with the students. (Very good)

Would you rather have a book than lecturenotes?

5 svarande

Yes3 60%
No2 40%

- I said yes because I would have liked to have a book to follow, but actually I want both lecture notes to read and a book to follow. (Yes)
- b?da ?r b?st (No)

Did you look up things in the reference litterature?

5 svarande

Never0 0%
Sometimes3 60%
Often2 40%

- I read portions of all of the presented reference literature. I also found "The Langevin Equation" by Coffey, Kalmykov and Waldron helpful. (Often)

How would you rate the difficulty of the problem sets?

5 svarande

Very difficult1 20%
Difficult1 20%
Average2 40%
Easy1 20%
Very easy0 0%

- I spent A LOT of time on the problem sets. They were informative because you had to really learn and understand the material to answer the questions. The questions were well-stated and understandable. I would, however, remove the questions whose solutions can be found in textbooks or elsewhere as they are less informative for the students who choose to solve the problems in that way (e.g. the Brownian motion mean squared distance, derive Kramer's equation). (Very difficult)

How much time did you spend for solving the problems compared to other courses?

5 svarande

Much more0 0%
Somewhat more0 0%
Average3 60%
Somewhat less2 40%
Much less0 0%

- It was similar to other theoretical physics courses. (Average)

To follow the course, my prerequisites have been ..

5 svarande

More than enough1 20%
Enough4 80%
Not enough0 0%

Did the course meet your expectations?

5 svarande

Yes, to a large extent2 40%
Yes, to some extent3 60%
I do not know0 0%
No0 0%

Comments and suggestions on how to improve the course

- Overall, I was very happy with the course. I think it would have been helpful to have a textbook to follow, but then again switching between the different reference books was okay too. Also, I am not sure how beneficial the functional integral methods lecture was, perhaps other students could follow it better, but it was a little too hard for me. If there would have been a homework problem concerning that material, I would have been forced to learn it better, but with the single lecture and no problem, I frankly didn't learn much.

Kursutvärderingssystem från

[Theoretical physics home page] [KTH home page]   webmaster