Recent content by doggydan42

Yes, I am definitely aware the colleges have their own policies. I am trying to determine (roughly) how much of an issue/concern this might be. Is it that most colleges will accept (including top universities) or is it more 50/50 or maybe most will reject credits?

Do you mean in going from masters to PhD? Going into either program I know how to look for an advisor. But I definitely did not consider the question of getting an advisor when going into a PhD program with a masters.

Hello. I have been accepted into a few Graduate programs in physics. I have narrowed down my choices to two: one in America, UMich, and one in Israel, namely the Weizmann institute. There is an important distinction between the two programs. In America, it is a PhD program, which from what I...

I am looking to learn about these topological effects or phases in solids. More specifically, I'm trying to find a set of lecture notes or a textbook or some other text that do not shy away from discussing homotopy classes and the application algebraic topology to describe these materials. I...

Awesome. Thanks for the advice!

Schwartz sounds like the right next step. Out of curosity, are both Peskin and Schroeder, and Schwartz on the same level, or is Peskin more advanced?

Do you think Schwartz's book might be good for continuing with topics that should follow Tong's notes? Also, I've heard that his book covers topic in a different order than standards like Peskin and Schroeder, is that beneficial?

I meant I want the details. I can sometimes figure them out, but there were some steps in Tong's notes that I unfortunately could not. Luckily, only for this semester I have the opportunity to ask someone who's taken QFT about it.

Hello, I have been following Tong's notes on QFT and have found them to be a great introduction. I am almost at the end and am trying to figure out how to proceed. I have seen recommendations on David Skinner's notes, but I think I want to use a textbook either with Skinner's notes or maybe...

So locally, the transformation of a vector field would be the same passive/active?

I think I understand it a bit better now. Thank you!

Sorry for not writing them out in horizontal order, I wasn't aware I could do that with latex. I looked at a another lecture notes, and it seems like the notation is ##(\partial_\nu \phi)(y) = \partial'_\nu \phi(y)##, where ##y = \Lambda^{-1}x## because it is an active transformation. So I see...

I'm currently watching lecture videos on QFT by David Tong. He is going over lorentz invariance and classical field theory. In his lecture notes he has, $$(\partial_\mu\phi)(x) \rightarrow (\Lambda^{-1})^\nu_\mu(\partial_\nu \phi)(y)$$, where ##y = \Lambda^{-1}x##. He mentions he uses active...

The professor basically said not to bother asking.

I'm taking vector calculus, but the professor just mentioned that and went on. So I was curious as to why that statement was true.