QM Prep: Jumping into QFT with Griffiths & Shankar

  • Thread starter Thread starter WannabeNewton
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Qft
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the preparation needed to transition from quantum mechanics (QM) to quantum field theory (QFT), specifically regarding the adequacy of various textbooks and resources. Participants explore whether familiarity with Griffiths' Introduction to QM and other texts is sufficient for understanding Srednicki's QFT, as well as the mathematical skills required for beginners in QFT.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that Griffiths' Introduction to QM may be a good starting point, but others recommend supplementing it with Shankar's Principles of QM for a more comprehensive understanding.
  • David Tong's notes are mentioned as a more understandable resource for QFT, with some participants emphasizing the importance of using multiple resources to grasp the subject.
  • Several participants recommend additional texts, such as Zee's QFT in a Nutshell and Griffiths' own particle physics text, to aid in the transition to QFT.
  • One participant advises that internalizing bra/ket notation and understanding the Dirac equation can provide valuable insights before tackling QFT.
  • There is a discussion about the level of mathematical skills required for beginners in QFT, with some suggesting that certain mathematical concepts can be learned alongside QFT studies.
  • Concerns are raised about the necessity of advanced math courses for research in QFT or string theory, with a consensus that theoretical physicists should be comfortable with abstract mathematics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the adequacy of different texts and the mathematical preparation needed for QFT. There is no clear consensus on whether additional advanced math courses are necessary, as opinions vary on the importance of self-study and the level of math skills required.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the mathematical skills needed for theoretical work may not be thoroughly covered in typical physics textbooks, suggesting that self-study may be necessary. The discussion reflects varying levels of preparedness and differing opinions on the best resources for transitioning to QFT.

WannabeNewton
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
5,850
Reaction score
553
Hi guys. So I just finished most of Griffith's Introduction to QM text (including the problems). I was wondering, is this text enough to delve into Srednicki's Quantum Field Theory text or should I also go through Shankar's Principles of QM? Relativity should not be an issue (I hope) as I have knowledge of it at the level of Carroll's Spacetime and Geometry text. Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
WannabeNewton said:
Hi guys. So I just finished most of Griffith's Introduction to QM text (including the problems). I was wondering, is this text enough to delve into Srednicki's Quantum Field Theory text or should I also go through Shankar's Principles of QM? Relativity should not be an issue (I hope) as I have knowledge of it at the level of Carroll's Spacetime and Geometry text. Thanks in advance.

I personally find David Tong's notes to be more understandable than any QFT text:
http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/tong/qft.html I guess you can (and should) supplement this notes with textbooks and try to see if you can understand the subject... if not, then just pick up the necessary pre-requisites along the way!
 
Woah thanks. I particularly like the fact that it has videos =D.
 
Also, I've found Zee's QFT in a Nutshell to be very good.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If all you have is Griffith's, I'd suggest at least using Shankar as a reference. You really need to internalize bra/ket notation (and what it implies about vector/function spaces) before you can begin to play around with more field theoretic ideas. The easier the notation is to manipulate, and the more internalized the ideas, the less you'll get hung up on the "normal" quantum mechanical operations.

While this next advice is a bit unconventional- get acquainted with the Dirac equation before you start with quantum field theory. Try to solve it for the free particle and the hydrogen atom (it can be solved exactly), and look at some expectation values of operators. I often think we move to quickly from quantum mechanics in a non-relativistic setting to field theory and skip some of the insight that can be gained with Dirac as an intermediate. Shankar (among other books) treats the Dirac equation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Should a beginner in QFT have very strong math skills or is this math skills gained later during the study?
 
zahero_2007 said:
Should a beginner in QFT have very strong math skills or is this math skills gained later during the study?

The David Tong QFT notes previously mentioned should give you a good idea.

http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/tong/qft.html

If you've had a year of undergrad QM that used Dirac notation, you should be reasonably prepared. Some math you should already have (like contour integration, but you can learn that in an afternoon from Boas or another "math methods" book), and some is part of learning QFT (e.g. spinors). It's a good idea to have a "math methods" book handy for specific topics like the gamma function.
 
  • #10
Thank You , so if I want to do research in QFT or string theory , should I do additional courses in advanced math other than that required by a traditional QFT or string theory and also have very strong skills in math to do research ?
 
  • #11
zahero_2007 said:
Thank You , so if I want to do research in QFT or string theory , should I do additional courses in advanced math other than that required by a traditional QFT or string theory and also have very strong skills in math to do research ?

A theoretical physicist needs to be comfortable with abstract mathematics to be able to read the mathematical literature. The math needed for theoretical work is not always explained in a friendly "for physicists" textbook. Unfortunately, you probably won't have time for much additional coursework, so much of this has to be picked up by self-study.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0521829607/?tag=pfamazon01-20 book may give you the flavor of some of the math involved.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
8K