Recent content by noir1993

Then there is the cover of The Feynmam Lectures on Gravitation. https://www.amazon.com/dp/0813340381/?tag=pfamazon01-20 And I also love the covers of The Feynmam Lectures in Physics - The Definitive Edition. I don't know whether they are internationally available.

Chaos An Introduction to Dynamical Systems Authors: Alligood, Kathleen T., Sauer, Tim, Yorke, James https://www.amazon.com/dp/0387946772/?tag=pfamazon01-20 This book features a painting by René Magritte on the cover. I believe the artwork is named Golconda. It's a pity the preview cover isn't...

Griffiths has written books on introductory quantum mechanics, particle physics, and classical electrodynamics. I am unaware of this book on quantum field theory.

In 'Quantum Mechanics, 3rd Ed by S. Gasiorowicz, the author discusses the relevant portion of Dirac's text in the very beginning of Chapter 2 to motivate the validity of Schrödinger's equation. I will quote the relevant text here as it can shed some light sn the matter at hand: Supplement 18 A...

Thank you for this illuminating reply. It cleared every doubt that I had. I apologize for not being able to catch it early on from your comments and forced you to spell everything out! But I am very grateful for the answer! And the digression about the "four operators" came from this comment...

I recently came across a book by Gerard 't Hooft. If anyone can provide a feedback, I'd be really grateful. And you can even access it for free at http://www.springer.com/in/book/9783319412849 The Cellular Automaton Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics Authors: 't Hooft, Gerard A radically...

Hence I posted a comment earlier stating this is in a different manner. I hope you can appreciate the reason behind my confusion. :)

So this expression has four time ordered operators?

I know that we can consider differentials and integrals as operators in the mathematical sense (as done in say, linear algebra or operator theory, i.e any transformation) but here I feel when we talk about time ordering of 'operators', we are talking about observables or rather "operators as...

I was talking with respect to the second order term again. I was under the impression that the operatiors being time ordered are the Hamiltonians H_I at different t's. But are we considering all the integrals ∫dt as operators also?

It is sheer modesty to call this a set of lecture notes. It's basically a book. I have come across your notes before and have a copy saved in my reference manager. I decided to go through it after mastering the basics. In any case, I would like to thank you for making them available!

With reference to comments made by @hilbert2 and @vanhees71, I have a question: If we treat the integration as operators then should not the time ordering now contain four operators instead of just two? Or am I missing something?

It's not about the calculations. :D It seems I just got confused by the notation. It makes sense now.

I am studying quantum field theory from [David Tong's lecture notes][1] and I am stuck at a particular place. In Page 52., under the heading *3.1.1 Dyson's Formula*, Tong introduces an unitary operator U(t, t_0) = T \exp(-i\int_{t_0}^{t}H_I(t') dt') He then introduces the usual definition of...

Thank you for the reference. I was actually looking for an encyclopaedic book like this one.