High Energy Another typo in Peskin & Schroeder's QFT?

  • Thread starter Thread starter apostolosdt
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Peskin Qft
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on a potential typo in Peskin & Schroeder's Quantum Field Theory, specifically regarding the expression on page 103 following equation (4.68). The poster questions whether the field ##\phi_f({\mathbf p}_f)## should be complex conjugated in that context. The consensus is that it indeed should be complex conjugated, confirming the suspicion of an undetected error. This highlights the importance of careful proofreading in academic texts. Typos in foundational texts like this can lead to misunderstandings in complex topics.
apostolosdt
Messages
178
Reaction score
204
I'm using a Peskin & Schroeder's copy that looks like it has all typos corrected and I wonder if the following is an undetected typo:
On pp. 103 and on the RHS of the bra expression just after (4.68), shouldn't the ##\phi_f({\mathbf p}_f)## be complex conjugated?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes Delta2, malawi_glenn and vanhees71
Physics news on Phys.org
Im currently reading mathematics for physicists by Philippe Dennery and André Krzywicki, and I’m understanding most concepts however I think it would be better for me to get a book on complex analysis or calculus to better understand it so I’m not left looking at an equation for an hour trying to figure out what it means. So here comes the split, do I get a complex analysis book? Or a calculus book? I might be able to Borrow a calculus textbook from my math teacher study that for a bit and...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
11K
Replies
4
Views
10K