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

  • Thread starter Thread starter apostolosdt
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Peskin Qft
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
TLDR: is Blennow "Mathematical Methods for Physics and Engineering" a good follow-up to Altland "Mathematics for physicists"? Hello everybody, returning to physics after 30-something years, I felt the need to brush up my maths first. It took me 6 months and I'm currently more than half way through the Altland "Mathematics for physicists" book, covering the math for undergraduate studies at the right level of sophystication, most of which I howewer already knew (being an aerospace engineer)...
I've gone through the Standard turbulence textbooks such as Pope's Turbulent Flows and Wilcox' Turbulent modelling for CFD which mostly Covers RANS and the closure models. I want to jump more into DNS but most of the work i've been able to come across is too "practical" and not much explanation of the theory behind it. I wonder if there is a book that takes a theoretical approach to Turbulence starting from the full Navier Stokes Equations and developing from there, instead of jumping from...

Similar threads

Back
Top