Qm=>qft

[MathematicalPhysicist]

What preliminary knowledge of QM should I know before learning QFT, or should I learn QFT in parallel with me learning QM?

[dx]

It's best to have a very thorough knowledge of QM before attempting a study of QFT, otherwise you will find QFT books incomprehensible. If you just can't wait, I suggest reading Feynman's popular book on QED, or Zee's QFT textbook after you learn a bit of QM.

[tiny-tim]

What preliminary knowledge of QM should I know before learning QFT, or should I learn QFT in parallel with me learning QM?

Hi MathematicalPhysicist! :smile:

Read the preface to Weinberg's Quantum Theory of Fields, Volume I, before you decide :wink: … http://books.google.com/books?id=h9kR4bmCPIUC&pg=RA1-PR19&lpg=PR20&ots=XL_hzr0XLd&dq=%22Why+another+book+on+quantum+field+theory%22# v=onepage&q=%22Why%20another%20book%20on%20quantum%20field%2 0theory%22&f=false!

[Fredrik]

You should at least know the stuff in Isham's book (http://books.google.com/books?id=xR3sS2hEFzcC&lpg=PP1&dq=isham&lr=&hl=sv&pg=PA74#v=onepage&q=&f=false). In my opinion, it's not enough to have a working knowledge of "wave mechanics", i.e. wave functions, the Schrödinger equation and that kind of stuff.

[MathematicalPhysicist]

Well, thus far I went through QM theory 1 in my univ, what I have come about I guess most of QM vol 1 by Cohen-Tannoudji (I mean from class most of the time, it's pretty tiresome to read from this volume), and this coming fall semester I will be learning QM 2 theory, still undergraduate, I am planning to learn as well some graduate maths courses this fall (which starts in october here), any advice which topics in Cohen-Tanoudji to read in volume 2?

Have I said already that it's pretty tiring to go through Cohen-Tannoudji, and from computer screen?! (-:

[vanesch]

A good QM book that gets you ready (that's its aim) for QFT, is Sakurai (modern QM). You'll recognize stuff from Cohen-Tannoudji, but it is more condensed, and gives sometimes more insight (but much less broad).

[Landau]

I recommend Ballentine (http://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Mechanics-Development-Leslie-Ballentine/dp/9810241054). I am going through it myself and I like it very much; it's clear and formal, where Sakurai sometimes tends to obscure things by hiding the mathematical structure.

[RedX]

Well, a typical order might be QM, relativistic QM, and then QFT. But obviously you don't need everything from QM for QFT, just as you don't need everything from relativistic QM for QFT. For example you don't need to solve the hydrogen atom in QM to do QFT, or any detailed scattering calculations in QM for that matter.

I'd just dive into QFT with an easier book like Mandl and Shaw, just to get you going, keeping in mind that later on you'll read a proper book on QFT which will show you how undetailed the easier book was.

I actually thought Zee's book was for people who already knew a bit of QFT. I can't imagine reading that without having done a bit of QFT. That derivation of the Weinberg-Coleman potential in the chapter on effective potentials, without using Feynman diagrams (!), seem to me a bit advanced.

O and I imagine a bit of knowledge of classical field theory, some CFT - lagrangians and stuff - would help in QFT.

[maverick280857]

You might find this link useful:

http://fliptomato.wordpress.com/2006/12/30/from-griffiths-to-peskin-a-lit-review-for-beginners/