Most Physics undergraduate programs have a course on Modern Physics, which is often taught in the way you are asking for. Though only up to the origins of quantum mechanics. This textbook, for example does this [1].

The problem is that after the basics of QM, there were literally hundreds of papers by dozens of important scientists developing the subsequent theory. And you can no longer teach the subject in a linear historical fashion.

[1] https://www.cengage.com/c/modern-physics-3e-serway-moses-moy...

I think the book called "Quantum mechanics" by max Planck and Neil bohr is quite similar to what you need. And atleast in my country it's available for less than 2.5$ usd converted so it's pretty damn cheap However of course I think you'd be able to find an ebook about it too Just include max Planck and neil bohr as the authors lol.

I would recommend watching Curt Jaimungal's series of talks with Jacob Barandes. He gives a nice background history of various aspects of QM, including the formulation of Matrix and Wave mechanics (and loads of other ideas). Barandes is excellent at clearly articulating complex ideas in very simple, concise terms. He also has his own formulation of QM based on "Indivisible non-Markovian Stochastic Processes". Even if you disagree with his ideas, the interviews are quite fascinating.

In this interview he goes over pretty much exactly what you mentioned (and a lot more):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oWip00iXbo

This one is not exactly a “textbook” but it is more advanced and technical than most “popular science” books and follows a historical presentation:

https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-quantum-cookbook...

The Quantum Cookbook

Mathematical Recipes for the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics

Jim Baggott

1:Planck's Derivation of E = hn: The Quantisation of Energy

2:Einstein's Derivation of E = mc2: The Equivalence of Mass and Energy

3:Bohr's Derivation of the Rydberg Formula: Quantum Numbers and Quantum Jumps

4:De Broglie's Derivation of / = h/p: Wave-particle Duality

5:Schrödinger's Derivation of the Wave Equation: Quantisation as an Eigenvalue Problem

6:Born's Interpretation of the Wavefunction: Quantum Probability

7:Heisenberg, Bohr, Robertson, and the Uncertainty Principle : The Interpretation of Quantum Uncertainty

8:Heisenberg's Derivation of the Pauli Exclusion Principle: The Stability of Matter and the Periodic Table

9:Dirac's Derivation of the Relativistic Wave Equation: Electron Spin and Antimatter

10:Dirac, Von Neumann, and the Derivation of the Quantum Formalism: State Vectors in Hilbert Space

11:Von Neumann and the Problem of Quantum Measurement: The 'Collapse of the Wavefunction'

12:Einstein, Bohm, Bell, and the Derivation of Bell's Inequality: Entanglement and Quantum Non-locality

The book “quantum” was a great read. Doesn’t really delve into any theories, but covers the general story of the physicists on the eve of QM

Weinberg's Lectures on Quantum Mechanics has an illuminating historical introduction for its first chapter. The introduction to his Quantum Theory of Fields is more specifically about quantum field theory, fittingly, and focuses on later developments.

If you want something that's more focused throughout on the historical progression, a classic book is Jammer's Conceptual Development of Quantum Mechanics, but it assumes you're already familiar with quantum and statistical mechanics.

If you like videos, the physicist Jorge Diaz has excellent videos accessibly detailing the experimental and theoretical history https://www.youtube.com/@jkzero/playlists

However, what I crave is a technical book that is based upon the history of the subject

Not a book per se, but if interested in videos, run, don't walk to check out Jorge Diaz's channel (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCJl3-pHGuU for example). It is just what you're asking for.

Another underrated channel for historical chemistry/physics fans: Marb's Lab at https://www.youtube.com/@Marbslab

“QED and the Men Who Made It” [1] might be close to what you’re after for quantum theory at least. Unlike other popular accounts, it gets quite technical and covers a lot of the historical dead ends that people had during the development of quantum field theory.

[1] https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691033273/qe...

The introduction to Vol 1 of Weinberg’s Quantum Theory of Fields does this really well, albeit briefly. It feels like getting an “insider’s view” of the historical developments.

Indeed. I want to see how it was derived historically along with the experiments that validated each step of the way.

It's like when the doctor says "this won't hurt at all". It WILL hurt your brain, QM is not easy.

I'm looking for a QM book structured similar to Norvig LISP books, ie following a demonstrative didactic method, by building computational implementations of toy models demonstrating various aspects of QM (not just QC), toy models of resonator, particle in a box, etc

As I understand it, arXiv is for research-level original work , not for uploading textbooks or notes.

Off topic, but the utility of the Hamiltonian is debatable.

You can solve any problem by using only the Lagrangian, there is really no need for the Hamiltonian, which also has the disadvantage of not being relativistically invariant, like the Lagrangian.

Also the name of "Hamiltonian" is somewhat misused. The most important contribution of Hamilton has been the definition of Hamilton's integral, i.e. the integral over time of the Lagrangian. That is an extremely important function and it would have deserved better the name of "Hamiltonian", than the less important Hamiltonian, which also was not introduced for the first time by Hamilton.

How to transform the system of equations of Lagrange to the "Hamiltonian" form had already been described by Poisson, and then by Cauchy, the latter using a form exactly equivalent to that presented later by Hamilton.

The notation H for the Hamiltonian has nothing to do with the name of Hamilton. Lagrange had used H for this quantity in 1811, without giving any meaning to the letter, then Hamilton in 1834 has reused the notations of Lagrange, adding "function S" for Hamilton's integral, also without giving any meanings to the letters.

Practically speaking, QM can be taught without the assumption that students understand the Hamiltonian formalism, simply by starting with Hilbert spaces and operators on Hilbert spaces. In fact, I would claim that having taken a class on basic linear algebra would better prepare you to understand quantum mechanics than mastering classical mechanics. QM is generally taught by referencing classical mechanics, but I believe that's more reflective of the fact that most universities require classical mechanics as a core course, and students coming in to QM will have generally taken it.