Classical Looking for book about relativistic classical field theory

[StenEdeback]

Hi,

I am trying to learn relativistic classical field theory as a preparation for studying quantum field theory.
I am currently reading chapter 13 i Herbert Goldstein's Classical Mechanics edition 3, but I think that this book is a bit too brief and does not fully derive and explain the formulas.
I would be grateful for advice.Sten E

 

[anuttarasammyak]

Landau-Lifshitz's classical theory of fields is a classic, though I do not know if it is good for introduction to quantum field.

 

[vanhees71]

Don't use "Goldstein" 3rd edition. It's a distortion of the original 2nd edition making it worse, containing several mistakes (wrong treatment of anholonomous constraints using the Hamilton principle of least action contradicting the correct results from the treatment using d'Alembert's principle without even mentioning that there's a difference) and inconsistencies (switching the sign convention of the metric from one section to another). Concerning relativity the 2nd edition cannot be unanimously recommended, because it uses the old-fashioned $\mathrm{i} c t$ (pseudo-Euclidean) convention.

Indeed, I think the best book as an introduction to relativistic classical field theory (electrodynamics and general relativity) is Landau and Lifshitz vol. 1. Relativistic hydro is sketched quite well in vol. 6.

A somewhat unusual introduction, but precisely because of this alternative approach a gem:

D. E. Soper, Classical field theory, Dover Publications, Minneola, New York (2008).

 

[malawi_glenn]

Good beginner book https://www.amazon.com/dp/1541674065/?tag=pfamazon01-20

I think this is a good advanced book https://www.amazon.com/dp/1108477011/?tag=pfamazon01-20 but perhaps it is not suitable as a "first" book.

 

[StenEdeback]

Landau-Lifshitz's classical theory of fields is a classic, though I do not know if it is good for introduction to quantum field.

Thank you anuttarasammyak!

 

[StenEdeback]

Don't use "Goldstein" 3rd edition. It's a distortion of the original 2nd edition making it worse, containing several mistakes (wrong treatment of anholonomous constraints using the Hamilton principle of least action contradicting the correct results from the treatment using d'Alembert's principle without even mentioning that there's a difference) and inconsistencies (switching the sign convention of the metric from one section to another). Concerning relativity the 2nd edition cannot be unanimously recommended, because it uses the old-fashioned $\mathrm{i} c t$ (pseudo-Euclidean) convention.

Indeed, I think the best book as an introduction to relativistic classical field theory (electrodynamics and general relativity) is Landau and Lifshitz vol. 1. Relativistic hydro is sketched quite well in vol. 6.

A somewhat unusual introduction, but precisely because of this alternative approach a gem:

D. E. Soper, Classical field theory, Dover Publications, Minneola, New York (2008).

Thank you vanhees71!

 

[StenEdeback]

Good beginner book https://www.amazon.com/dp/1541674065/?tag=pfamazon01-20

I think this is a good advanced book https://www.amazon.com/dp/1108477011/?tag=pfamazon01-20 but perhaps it is not suitable as a "first" book.

Thank you malawi_glenn!

 

[atyy]

It's old, but possibly useful.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0471595519/?tag=pfamazon01-20

 

[Demystifier]

I think this is a good advanced book https://www.amazon.com/dp/1108477011/?tag=pfamazon01-20 but perhaps it is not suitable as a "first" book.

At a similar level M. Burgess, Classical Covariant Fields.

 

[Demystifier]

Don't use "Goldstein" 3rd edition. It's a distortion of the original 2nd edition making it worse, containing several mistakes (wrong treatment of anholonomous constraints ...

Are the anholonomous constraints treated correctly in older editions?

 

[StenEdeback]

At a similar level M. Burgess, Classical Covariant Fields.

Thank you Demystifier!

 

[StenEdeback]

It's old, but possibly useful.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0471595519/?tag=pfamazon01-20

Thank you atyy!

 

[vanhees71]

Are the anholonomous constraints treated correctly in older editions?

Yes!

 

[malawi_glenn]

The book by Burgess "Classical covariant fields" is available free from Cambridge Core https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/classical-covariant-fields/B1B9650BCAFAC6395E1B67B5047B8306

 

[malawi_glenn]

This looks fun, I have not read it though https://www.amazon.com/dp/331985710X/?tag=pfamazon01-20

 

[Bishal Banjara]

I believe the book "Gravitation: Foundations and Frontiers" by T. Padmanabhan (and his online lectures) is best. And Landau-Lifshitz's classical theory of fields, Feynman's lectures on Gravitation, Gravitation and Cosmology by S. Weinberg are better.