I guess it should be my mistake somewhere.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Theory-Fields-Modern-Applications/dp/0521670543/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b

On Page 30, for the derivation of EQ. (15.7.19), the nilpotency of BRST operator on the ghost for gauge transformation,

[tex]\delta _{\theta}s\omega_\alpha &=& - \frac{1}{2}C_{\alpha\beta\gamma}\delta_\theta(\omega_\beta\omega_\gamma)

&=&\frac{1}{4}\theta (C_{\alpha\beta\gamma}C_{\beta\delta\epsilon}\omega_\delta\omega_\epsilon\omega_\gamma ++ C_{\alpha\beta\gamma}C_{\gamma\delta\epsilon}\omega_\beta\omega_\delta\omega_\epsilon)=...

[/tex]

The plus "++" above, I suppose it should be "-" considering [tex]\omega[/tex] is an anticommuting ghost and the BRST operator is odd and acting from left. Steven also mentioned this in the paragraph below Eq. (15.7.19).

Did I miss any point here? Since then we would not have nilpotency of BRST operator on the ghost.

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Is this a mistake in Steven Weiberg's QFT II textbook?

Can you offer guidance or do you also need help?

Draft saved
Draft deleted

Loading...

Similar Threads - mistake Steven Weiberg's | Date |
---|---|

Steven Weinberg offers a way to explain inflation | Nov 17, 2009 |

Steven Weinberg bets Andrei Linde's life, and one dog | Nov 3, 2005 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**