Looking for book about relativistic classical field theory

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on recommended literature for studying relativistic classical field theory in preparation for quantum field theory. Key recommendations include "Classical Theory of Fields" by Landau and Lifshitz as the best introductory text, along with "Classical Field Theory" by D. E. Soper for beginners. The third edition of Herbert Goldstein's "Classical Mechanics" is strongly advised against due to significant errors and inconsistencies. Additionally, "Classical Covariant Fields" by M. Burgess is noted as a suitable resource, available for free from Cambridge Core.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of classical mechanics principles
  • Familiarity with special relativity concepts
  • Basic knowledge of field theory
  • Ability to interpret mathematical formulations in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study "Classical Theory of Fields" by Landau and Lifshitz for foundational knowledge
  • Read "Classical Field Theory" by D. E. Soper for an alternative introduction
  • Explore "Classical Covariant Fields" by M. Burgess available on Cambridge Core
  • Investigate "Gravitation: Foundations and Frontiers" by T. Padmanabhan for advanced insights
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for physics students, educators, and researchers focusing on classical field theory and its applications in quantum field theory.

StenEdeback
Messages
65
Reaction score
38
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
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Landau-Lifshitz's classical theory of fields is a classic, though I do not know if it is good for introduction to quantum field.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: mpresic3, StenEdeback, malawi_glenn and 1 other person
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).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Demystifier, StenEdeback and malawi_glenn
anuttarasammyak said:
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!
 
vanhees71 said:
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!
 
  • #10
vanhees71 said:
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?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: StenEdeback
  • #11
Demystifier said:
At a similar level M. Burgess, Classical Covariant Fields.
Thank you Demystifier!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Demystifier
  • #13
Demystifier said:
Are the anholonomous constraints treated correctly in older editions?
Yes!
 
  • Love
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: malawi_glenn and Demystifier
  • #16
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.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
19K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K