Studying Reading Quantum field theory by Weinberg books?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the suitability of specific physics and mathematics books for learning quantum field theory (QFT). A participant expresses difficulty with recommended texts due to their heavy mathematical content, seeking advice on whether to continue with these books or explore alternatives. Suggestions include starting with the Schwartz book for QFT, as well as other accessible texts like "Student Friendly QFT," "Srednicki QFT," "Hatfield," and "Peskin." Additionally, it is recommended to first strengthen understanding of advanced quantum mechanics with texts such as "Shankar" and "Sakurai," and to consider general relativity resources like "Hartle," "Dirac," "Carroll," and "Zee" before tackling QFT. The consensus is that a solid foundation in these subjects will facilitate a better grasp of QFT concepts.
Richa Sharma
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Is it a good choice to read these books first or there's a better way. My professor recommended me these books but as I started them they had bulk of maths and really matter was not that understandable on my first try. I am an engineer. I read physics in free time I can get , so shall I go ahead with these books or please suggest better mathematics and Physics books.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I haven't started QFT yet, but will likely start using this book - https://www.amazon.com/dp/1107034736/?tag=pfamazon01-20 - sometime next week. I've read a little bit of it, and I like how he introduces tensors. Try checking out the local or school library and see one that has a mathematical treatment you like.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Richa Sharma said:
Is it a good choice to read these books first or there's a better way. My professor recommended me these books but as I started them they had bulk of maths and really matter was not that understandable on my first try. I am an engineer. I read physics in free time I can get , so shall I go ahead with these books or please suggest better mathematics and Physics books.

I think the Weinberg texts are a bit of a tricky way to start off. I'd look at the book mentioned above (Schwartz) as well as books like Student Friendly QFT and Srednicki QFT. Maybe also Hatfield and Peskin.

It might be easier to first refresh advanced and intermediate QM (like Shankar and Sakurai Modern QM) if you need to and maybe go through GR first (books like Hartle, Dirac, Carroll and Zee). Basically get everything down well and then try QFT.
 
I’ve been looking through the curricula of several European theoretical/mathematical physics MSc programs (ETH, Oxford, Cambridge, LMU, ENS Paris, etc), and I’m struck by how little emphasis they place on advanced fundamental courses. Nearly everything seems to be research-adjacent: string theory, quantum field theory, quantum optics, cosmology, soft matter physics, black hole radiation, etc. What I don’t see are the kinds of “second-pass fundamentals” I was hoping for, things like...
TL;DR Summary: I want to do a PhD in applied math but I hate group theory, is this a big problem? Hello, I am a second-year math and physics double major with a minor in data science. I just finished group theory (today actually), and it was my least favorite class in all of university so far. It doesn't interest me, and I am also very bad at it compared to other math courses I have done. The other courses I have done are calculus I-III, ODEs, Linear Algebra, and Prob/Stats. Is it a...

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
102
Views
5K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top