sooooo much maaath
Seriously, if you're weak in calculus and differential equations (like me), don't even attempt this book. According to the publisher, it's intended to be a textbook for advanced undergraduate students, and the author asserts up front that you should be at least moderately familiar with Fourier analysis before delving into the content. The math is heavy on diff eq, of course, but also relies on relatively advanced calculus concepts like operators (in particular, Hamiltonian and Hermitean), and most of the solutions are expressed (and discussed) in terms of eigenvalues and eigenfunctions (in absolute simplest terms, the use of scaling factors in functions in order to produce discrete results, which are necessary to properly quantize actions).
Although the book includes multiple equations on virtually every page until the last two chapters, the author claims to be attempting to instruct you with as little mathematical backing as possible, at least in the earliest, foundational chapters. If you're soft on advanced math, you can still follow if you've got some prior grounding in the concepts. This is why I stuck it through to the end, despite not being able to actually perform the exercises or derive the equations on my own. I am "moderately familiar" with Fourier analysis, although don't ask me to perform such an analysis on my own. I've been an avid reader of quantum mechanical literature since my teens, so I can understand what Bohm is conveying even if I can't express it mathematically.
This text was state-of-the-art in the early 1950s, although that art has been somewhat extended since then. Notably absent from the text is any discussion of entanglement (although there is a description of the EPR paradox in a somewhat different context, the latters' attempt to discredit quantum mechanics by asserting that what it calls a "complete description" can be derived from only a fractional treatment of some of its "elements of reality" [their words]. Bohm demonstrates why this attempt is shortsighted, and why E / P / R fundamentally misunderstand the underlying assumptions of QM.) And although Feynman's early contributions are mentioned, there is no discussion of Feynman diagrams (scattering is discussed pretty thoroughly, but the idea of "particle exchange" was evidently too novel at the time of publication). And finally, in this pre-quark era, there is no mention of quantum chromodynamics. Even the basic four-force Standard Model had yet to come into existence; there is mention of the notion of "nuclear forces," but these had yet to be characterized, and are touched on in only the haziest of terms.
It bears pointing out that this book is almost entirely electrodynamic in nature; that is, it deals almost exclusively with moving electrons, either "free" or bound within atoms. You will come away with some deeper insights into how spectral lines are formed, and how electric and magnetic fields alter electronic activity within atoms, but if you've got enough grounding in quantum concepts to be able to follow the text in a non-mathematical way, you're not likely to come away with much more understanding than when you went in. The deepest insights to be taken are in how neither waves nor particles serve as an even partial description of the nature of matter, and of how "wave packets," an artificial construct serving to approximate wave behavior, probably come closer in most regards than either traditional concept. Matter is simply not what we think it is, and reality is simply not what we want it to be. If you're already familiar with QM, then you already know that causality has to be discarded in favor of statistical probability; in its emphasis on the "classical limit" (the correspondence principle), this book at least allows you to salvage your intuitive understanding of how things work, and even explains how, in aggregate, causality is preserved.
I took on the text as an intellectual exercise (as I'm continuing to do with others in the Dover science series), and it is certainly challenging in that regard. I'm moving on to the Electromagnetic Field text by Albert Shadowitz, and I can already tell I'm going to regret not having first detoured into my old college algebra and calc texts, not to mention the Dover volumes on ordinary differential equations and numerical methods for scientists and engineers.
Wish me luck.