5 comments about Quantum Theory.

1. This is a book for you to read again and again through your whole life. When you are an undergraduate, lots of good technical information are found in this volume regarding, for instance, wave packets or the hydrogen atom. As you get more experienced and, of course, if you have some interest in the philosophical issues raised by the subject, the book turns to be a reference again.



2. Don't let the original 1950's publication date fool you. This book is as relevant and important today as it was when it was first published.

   In fact, Bohm's lucid, pointed three-page preface-- in which he outlines in simple English the three exact ways Quantum Mechanics differs from Classical Mechanics (which I had never seen done before and which few physics students ever really grasp)-- that ALONE is worth the price of this book.

   Let me help you understand why, without reservation, I feel this book to be a masterpiece of clarity in exposition.

   When I first learned Quantum Mechanics-- and, as I have come to learn, my experience was not atypical-- it was basically axiomatic: "Here are these mathematical techniques. If we do this and that and then that to this function, then we can predict certain things about experimental results." I found this a tremendously difficult-- not to mention frustrating-- way of learning things. Mathematically intense, but with little physical understanding.

   I memorized the rules, and did OK in my courses, but what I really wanted to know was: WHY was I doing these things? Where did this stuff COME from? And, most importantly, what did this stuff MEAN?

   I got bits and pieces-- only hints, really-- from several other textbooks. When I got to grad school, I was excited to finally learn what it all meant. Unfortunately, my grad course was more of the same type of calculation-- just calculating more difficult things! In fact, I had almost given up at really understanding what it all MEANT, and was ready to take my graduate Quantum professor's advice to "Just learn the techniques and use the stuff" when I came across David Bohm.

   In a textbook that is more wordy than most novels-- and yet, in which not a single noun is extraneous or out of place-- Bohm takes us on a clear and exciting tour of WHERE Quantum Mechanics comes from, exactly HOW it developed from Classical Mechanics, exactly how it DIFFERS from Classical Mechanics, and, finally, what it all MEANS physically.

   He does this by consistantly referring to experiment, by devloping mathematical techniques as necessary, and by discussing and explaining in clear prose what such concepts as the wave function actually MEAN.

   It is difficult to overemphasize how comfortable one feels reading this book--- you feel that you are being guided with a firm yet gentle hand by one who truly understands what it means to truly EXPLAIN something. (For all the praise that is heaped on such texs as the Feynman Lectures and Landau and Lifshitz, they can't shake a stick at Bohm's abilities at lucidity in exposition.)

   Finally, after developing the traditional calculational techniques, in the last sections of the book Bohm discusses such alternatives as the "hidden variable" theory in balanced yet intriguing ways, and leaves you wanting more.

   If I am disappointed in anything, it would be only this:

   Why didn't this Shakespeare of physics authors write more?




3. I bought the book because of the good reviews below and the low price. I was a little disappointed with Bohm's explanations and wordings of concepts that I already know. I think that it'd be difficult for someone to learn anything from this book unless (s)he is already familiar with quantum mechanics. Anyhow, the book is still a good buy considering it is at least 5 times cheaper than textbooks on quantum mech.



4. The age of the book is what gives it a huge advantage to today's typical QT and QM textbook. Instead of presenting the concepts in the "status quo" of physics (usually just a ridiculously brief intro to why QT started, and then presenting Operators as things almost perfectly synonymous to classical concepts and continuing from there), this book really goes through the history of where all the math came from. Bohm is very careful about teaching you what parts of the math are just convenience tricks (like Operators) versus real necessities to QM. And also what parts are just based on just experiments. Unlike today, in the 1950's, QT and QM were still suspect theories, so students were taught of the known and possible holes (no pun intended :) in the theory. Bohm points these out throughout the whole book.



5. This is a fair textbook of quantum mechanics, and it is very cheap. Well, I mean cheap as well as cheap. It does not contain too much mathematics. However, the words are usually good substitutes. The book covers the usual basic material of quantum mechanics based on the wavefunctions; the particle in the most usual potentials; perturbation theory; the concept of spin, and so forth.
   
   However, I don't think that David Bohm was really among those who understood the meaning of quantum mechanics too well - and based on the other reviews, I think that the readers who claim that they finally understood quantum mechanics from this book have not really gotten the point either. Well, don't get me wrong: the book was written in 1950 and at that time, Bohm more or less believed the orthodox Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics even though he had many more doubts about the important principles of QM than what would have been appropriate.
   
   Nevertheless, David Bohm spends relatively too much time with his (rather unsuccessful) speculations about the "deeper", deterministic structure underlying quantum mechanics. David Bohm's second most well-known contribution to physics (after the Aharonov-Bohm effect) is his new version of the pilot wave theory, initiated by de Broglie in the late 1920s and used to change the interpretation of quantum mechanics.
   
   His new interpretation is based on the idea that the wavefunction is a real wave, and moreover there also exists a classical particle with a well-defined position. These two objects classically interact in such a way that the probabilistic results of quantum mechanics can be reproduced in several simplest contexts.
   
   However, this is not a correct idea for more convoluted systems; experimentally speaking, it contradicts special relativity (as required in relativistic quantum field theory), the existence of spin, and so forth. More generally, even without these advanced concepts in quantum mechanics, Bohm's idea goes against the spirit of quantum mechanics with its Hilbert spaces and different bases and operators on the same Hilbert space that are "equally important".
   
   Bohm's prejudices about determinism and the special role of the position operator may have followed from his unfortunate, conventional technical approach to quantum mechanics that always starts with wavefunctions in the position representation - an approach chosen also in this book. This representation leads many readers to the wrong conclusion that the wavefunction is something like a real classical wave in space - much like the electromagnetic wave - and that the position has a special role among the observables. I say "observable" because Bohm tries to humiliate the concept of an operator.
   
   I agree with others who say that we are not spending enough time by teaching the interpretational issues of quantum mechanics. Bohm's book does so. However I disagree that Bohm's approach is a good one. Instead, I would recommend Feynman's lectures on physics. Feynman's pedagogical treatment of quantum mechanics starts with two-dimensional Hilbert spaces. They are very useful because the reader understands that different bases (and operators) in the same Hilbert space may be equally important, and that the probabilistic interpretation of the amplitudes is absolutely essential.
   
   The magician Uri Geller has convinced David Bohm that he (Geller) had supernatural abilities - a point that Feynman liked to ridicule. I am afraid that this transformation of Bohm at the end of his life might be related to his exaggerated emphasis on philosophical prejudices in quantum mechanics, as opposed to the pragmatic goal to extract useful predictions.
   
   Quantum mechanics is weird. Sidney Coleman said that if thousands of philosophers had been trying, for thousands of years, to find the weirdest thing possible, they would have had never found a thing as weird as quantum mechanics. Nevertheless, quantum mechanics works, and we know that we can extract the information about probabilities of anything. (And the new insights about decoherence also explain where the difference between macroscopic and microscopic objects comes from.) In this sense I feel that the approach to quantum mechanics "Shut up and calculate" is a better one than wasting time with a wrong philosophy.
   
   Despite the criticism, the book is cheap enough so that I can recommend you to buy it. David Bohm was an interesting person even though he was a communist.

5 comments about Quantum Field Theory Demystified.

1. In reading other books by McMahon, he introduces topics like Schwarzchild radius and Schrodinger's equations and shows the mathematics along the way. Now, it might be that I wasn't ready for this book; however, with that said, McMahon should have reflected back and thought about a more appealing approach with the context of the book in line with a typical dummies book which means that no prerequisites are necessary including his other books and all steps are shown in a clear and slow presentation. Quantum Field DeMystified fails to make the subject easy for a novice who might choose this book off of a bookshelf, therefore, failing to be a DeMystifyed book. The only bright spot is McMahons style which is a fun atmospheric style that produces some abstract thinking like all his other books.



2. I ordered this book after I went through the first seven chapters of David Griffiths' "Introduction to Elementary Particles" and decided I wanted something that concentrated a little more on the theoretical side. Of course I didn't expect this book to be more than a peek into the mysteries of QFT, and the author is careful in the Preface to outline its limitations ("By design, this book is not thorough or complete....after completing this book, you will find that studying other quantum field theory books will be easier.") I hope he's right! I'm going to try tackling Zee next.
   
   Anyway, I think the book is OK given the obvious challenges of trying to present QFT in an understandable way to a novice. I certainly didn't get everything, but I did manage to understand most of the material and get most of the problems in the Quizzes. But I wonder if I would have found it intelligible if I had not already read Griffiths as well as Schutz's "A First Course in General Relativity", which gave me some familiarity with special relativity, the metric, the Einstein summation convention, the covariant derivative, etc. This would seem to be considerably more than than a background in "basic special relativity" which the author lists in the Preface as one of the prerequisites for understanding his book. In some sections it was only by cross-referencing Griffiths that I was able to be sure I understood the material, and to correct errors in the text.
   
   There are unfortunately plenty of errors, not as many as in "Quantum Mechanics Demystified" but still enough to give the strong impression that the author is either not putting much effort into proofreading, or delegating the task to less-than-fully-qualified individuals. McGraw-Hill should really do its readers/customers a favor and set up an erratum website. The author refers to one in his own website but it is not set up. The majority of the errors are minor arithmetical ones, but even these can often cause considerable confusion while the reader struggles to be sure it's not himself who is in the wrong. (Or are they a deliberate, diabolical strategy to force the reader to actually go through all the calculations?) But some are substantive and seriously interfere with comprehension. There's also an annoying tendency to be sloppy with the notation (or is the author trying to get the reader used to "sloppy physicist's notation"?) and to misplace superscripts and subscripts.
   
   For learning the Feynman rules, Griffiths Chapter 7 is much clearer. But after cracking my skull fruitlessly for hours on Griffiths problem 7.24, I was delighted to find it worked (albeit erroneously, see below) on pages 179-83, so I was able to find where I had gone wrong (just one wrong minus sign in the momenta, durn it!) The exposition of spontaneous symmetry breaking, the Higgs mechanism, and electroweak theory are nice for a beginner (now I'll do Griffiths Chapter 10 and 11).
   
   The following are a list of the most significant errors I've found that I'm relatively certain of (whenever possible by cross-referencing with Griffiths).
   
   pages 16-17: charges of strange and charmed quark switched
   
   page 32-34: in example 2.3, what happened to finding the Hamiltonian?
   
   page 37: the equation representing conservation of energy at the bottom of the page is wrong: it should read d(mu)T(superscript mu)(subscript 0) equals 0.
   
   page 43: equation just before section on Gauge Transformations should have "J(superscript nu)", not "J(superscript mu)".
   
   page 87: second equation is described as "using the notation of Chap. 1" when in fact the notation for unit vector "e carat" was not introduced in Chap. 1 and makes its first unexplained appearance here.
   
   page 103: first equation (p-m)(p+m) should read (pslash-m)(pslash+m) and third equation (p-m)u(p)=(p-m)(p+m)u(0) p should also be pslash.
   
   page 104 helicity operator is sigma vector dot p carat, not sigma vector dot p vector (I think).
   
   page 118 statement the "we..demote position and momentum from their lofty status as operators" would appear to contradict statement on bottom of page 4 that "momentum continues to play a role as an operator".
   
   page 150: Figure 7.7 has errors in labelling of incoming and outgoing particle lines.
   
   page 157: first 4 equations should have delta(q-p3-p4), not delta(q-p3+p4).
   
   page 159: last equation should omit (2pi)^4 delta(p1-p2-p3-p4) term.
   
   page 161: Figure 7.17 is for Question 2, not Question 1.
   
   page 169:last 3 equations denominator should be sqrt(2p0)(2pi)^3/2 (see page 135).
   
   page 177: in third and following equations, the second gamma matrix should be gamma(superscript nu), not gamma(superscript mu). Also, there should be another delta function term for the other vertex: (2pi)^4 delta(q+p2-p4), and an integration factor d4q/(2pi)^4. In general, Chapter 8 would greatly benefit from a clear, simple listing of the Feynman rules as Griffiths does in Chapter 7 section 5 of his book.
   
   page 179: according to Griffiths, sqrt(E+m) IS the normalization factor.
   
   page 183: second set of equations is for the RIGHT term of Equation 8.19, and should end up equalling 2p(i-1), not 2p(1-i), because g11=g22=-1. This gives M=-2g(subscript e)^2 which is the correct answer according to Griffiths (page 253 problem 7.24). But regardless, this is not the correct approach to solving the equation. It does not use the Einstein summation convention for the gamma matrices. See next note.
   
   page 185: this equation for absolute value of M squared is wrong and would have rendered the whole section incomprehensible if I didn't have Griffiths to refer to. The equation should read g(subscript e)^4/4q^4[Tr(pslash3+m)(gamma(superscript mu))(pslash1+m)(gamma(superscript nu))]x[Tr(pslash4+m)(gamma (subscript mu))(pslash2+m)(gamma(subscript nu))].
   
   page 202: first equation leaves out term -1/4(phi1^4+phi2^4) on left side and -3/2m2chi2 on right side, which would make correct final form
   -m^2chi^2. Then we get "a field chi with mass m and a field PSI (not chi) that is massless".
   
   page 212: first equation: delete "1/2". Second equation is gamma (subscript 5)^2, not ^5.
   
   page 216: first equation, unclear where last term (i Lbar gamma (superscript mu) d(subscript mu)L" comes from. Also first term should be preceded with i.
   
   page 217: second sentence missing a word: "preserve _____ of the action..."
   
   page 220: according to calculations on page 212, term 10.30 should equal zero!
   
   page 226: first line: where does the term (Dsubscriptmu phi)dagger (Dsubscriptmu phi) come from? In any event this should be (Dsubscript mu phi)dagger (Dsuperscriptmu phi).
   
   page 237: integrand in second equation should be exp[-ax^2/2+bx].
   
   Other suggestions to improve comprehension:
   
   page 78: a statement that A(superscript mu) is the wavefunction of the photon would be useful here rather than waiting until page 166.
   
   page 86: statement made that "In Chap. 4 we saw that this was due to ... " Show me where this is discussed in Chap. 4!
   
   page 141: discussion of the interaction picture is garbled. Which picture is in the middle? And why?
   
   page 151: it should be made explicitly clear that signs of momentum are opposite signs of direction for external antiparticle lines.
   
   page 154: some explication of equation 7.18 would be nice: I found it in Griffiths.
   
   page 155: some note that k is equivalent to q would be demystifying.
   
   page 174: are we supposed to just accept equations 2 and 3 as given, or be able to derive them ourselves?
   
   page 202: would help to put the term "vector bosons" in the Index and/or reference definition on page 76.
   
   Too bad the answers to the quiz and final exam questions aren't worked out for the reader's benefit.
   
   All in all though, it's a nice start!



3. I have not finished reading this book because the Kindle version makes the equations an unreadable mess! Don't buy the Kindle book unless they can get their scanners working on symbols, operators, etc. What good is it otherwise. I got my money back. As far as the content is concerned it is just right for a self-learner who wants to crack this nut. It is the appetizer before the main meal. One should not be over critical when any attempt to make this subject understandable should be applauded. I'll stick to the print version for now.



4. When I was first trying to learn Quantum Field Theory (QFT), at the end of my college years and at the beginning of the graduate schools, the jump from the "regular" quantum mechanics seemed almost insurmountable. Even with a full year of graduate quantum mechanics, the kinds of concepts and calculations that are the staple of the QFT seemed beyond anything that I had encountered in Physics before. Unfortunately to this day there aren't many QFT textbooks that will give you the benefit of the doubt when first learning the subject. Most of them aim to be comprehensive, rather than pedagogical. Which is unfortunate because many more basic concepts and results are not beyond the ability of a more motivated undergraduate to grasp. In the light of that, I wish that David McMahon's book had been published earlier. There clearly is a need for book of this type, for both those who are interested in preparing themselves for a full-fledged course on QFT, as well for many practicing Physicist who could benefit from knowing the bare essentials of QFT for their own line of research (particle physicists, astrophysicists, etc.). As correctly pointed out by other reviewers, the book has its flaws. The ones that I find particularly prominent are 1. Many mistakes, 2. It can be conceptually fuzzy and less than accurate when it comes to some key concepts. 3. Non-inclusion of non-relativistic QFT (important for condensed matter applications) 4. Inclusion of Supersymmetry, which is a non-standard topic for most textbooks, and not even a verified concept, and 5. Poor typesetting. However, even with those flaws, the book is an important text for everyone who is interested in learning about QFT on their own for the first time. But it is not meant for everyone: one year of college-level quantum mechanics and familiarity with the modern tensor notation would be the minimal requirement s for taking a fool advantage of this book.



5. This is not the first book from which I try to completely understand QFT. A awaited the coming out of this book with a huge anticipation, because I already owned two other books written by the same author - about the non-relativistic quantum mechanics and about the general relativity, and I consider them great. Unfortunately, this book doesn't quite fit the bill. The reasons:
   
   1. The connection between the Lagrangians and the Feynman rules is unclear (for instance, there is nothing mentioned about the Wick's theorem).
   
   2. There is essentially nothing about the divergences and renormalization.
   
   The reasons, why I don't criticize this book more harshly, are:
   
   1. There seems to be no really good "introduction" level book about QFT
   (the closest ones are Lahiri, "A First Book of QFT", Harris, "A Pedestrian Approach to QFT (out of print, used books expensive!), Greiner, "Field Quantization" and Hatfield, "QFT of Point Particles and Strings". But don't even approach any of these, if you hadn't mastered the Griffiths book about the elementary particles and the full-blown non-relativistic QM in Dirac's bra-ket notation !).
   
   2. Lots of derivations present in this book are either completely omitted or "left for the reader" in other QFT books.
   
   In other words, considering that QFT is the most difficult of the "ortodox", i.e. well established, physical theories, don't expect any "silver bullet" here. There is no such a bullet!

5 comments about Schaum's Outline of Quantum Mechanics (Schaum's).

1. La mayoría de los textos de Física Cuántica que he leído, son inabordables en algunos momentos por la complejidad de la misma notación, falta de ejemplos directos de aplicación, y deficientes estructuraciones del contenido. El resultado es que finalmente te ves rodeado de una gran cantidad de libros de texto, para cubrir diferentes capítulos.
   
   En cambio este libro, sobresale con holgura, cubriendo todas esas carencias.
   
   * La estructura del libro es correcta.
   * El número de ejemplos es muy amplio (como si no en un Schaum's).
   * La notación es la que normalmente se utiliza en este campo.
   
   ¡ Qué más se puede pedir, en un libro de texto !.
   
   Carlos Ortega
   2006-01-30



2. This book is a complete introductory course that presents the basic concepts of Quantum Mechanics.
   
   As a newcomer to this subject, I was puzzled by the separate definitions of the similar notions of inner product (denoted < , >), scalar product (denoted ( , )), scalar product (denoted < | >) and Dirac bracket (also denoted < | >). It would be most helpful if, in a future edition, the authors could define these four notions in one place, along with an explanation of the differences (if any) between them.
   
   Apart from this minor annoyance, for which I deducted one star, this book succesfully tackles a most important and difficult subject. The writing and presentation are up to the usually high standards of Schaum's Outline series. There are plenty of exercises, both solved and unsolved. And it's excellent value for money. For the price, there's no serious competition.
   
   A better mathematical treatment, based on linear vector spaces, may be found in "Principles of Quantum Mechanics" by Shankar.



3. This book is useful. There is a variety of problems from fairly easy to difficult, but in general, the problems are similar (and often the same) as problems in graduate texts such as Merzbacher, Cohen, etc.. My complaint with this book is not necessarily the typos (although they should be fixed given the popularity of this book). My complaint is that that the authors sometimes skip steps in the solutions that are so critical, that is is nearly impossible to understand them. A useful solution can leave out mathematical drudgery, and calculations, but it shouldn't leave out critical steps that have been covered earlier in the book, because a solutions manual like this is not usually used as a textbook, it is used as a reference.
   
   For instance I may want to try a practice problem on the Variational Method, and the problem leaves out steps that may have been covered in earlier chapters. So I spend hours playing with the problem until I find the solution. This is not useful, and not what a problems and solutions book should do. I understand that not every step can be included, but I would rather see more complete solutions, which might sacrifice the unsolved problems and the blank pages at the end of the book.
   
   This book seems to have been typewritten from the authors' handwritten notes, because many of the typos are consistent with penmanship. But one of the authors should go over all of the solutions, flesh out the missing steps, and correct the errors. Without doing this, the physics student can't rely on this book as a trusted source, since they never know if the error they encounter is a typo or their own mistake.
   
   Regardless, this is a useful book, and I have learned a lot from it.



4. Basic information, and lots of problems (many worked out, others with answers). Makes for good practice and review.



5. The detailed calculations and discussions of methodology in this book far exceed those presented in the typical quantum mechanics book. This book, along with the book Quantum Mechanics Demystified (these two books are a superb complement to one another and should used together), should be required accompanyments to any quantum mechanics book. While almost all quantum mechanics books give an adequate discussion of the basic Schroedinger Equation and its applications, they are usually flops insofar as matrix mechanics are concerned, especially in the case of angular momentum. These books more than makes up for that. I personally am using this book and Quantum Mechanics Demystified to review a subject that I studied more than 40 years ago and find it to be very clearly written, making it more than adequate to overcome some very substantial holes that were not covered by my previous books. The authors should be well pleased with their work.

5 comments about The Self-Aware Universe.

1. This is a wonderful and timely book. It gives a fresh view of science, religion, mind, body, consciousness and the universe, stimulates thinking and makes one really understand that s/he can make a difference!!



2. Very interesting book, a little bit into speculation and religion.
   The scientific part was well explained.
   The view about the universe changed for me.
   I would recommend this book to any one who is interested in quantum mechanics and filosofy...
   
   Your's
   
   Dr. MJ v Dijk PhD



3. We are all one consciousness experiencing our reality seperately. Each of us learning and contributing to this universal mind.
   I found this book to be very fascinating. Maggie & Amit Gaswami take you on a journey through physics to explain our existance in the universe. Implicitly detailing what science is really telling us about life and living systems, exactly how we are connected and what we can do with this new-found knowledge. I highly recommend this book!



4. Good Metaphysical understanding of life - that it consists of "The one consciousness". And that, all there is anywhere is this one consciousness. That all life interacts instantaneously and non-locally through a mechanism of life and living, difficult to comprehend when understood through the distorting lens of scientific thought and object orientated materialistic living. It underlines that matter is for the most part redundant or better considered as a reflex of thought and arises totally out of conditioning and sedimentations, termed quantum collapse - or "The classical self".
   
   On the otherhand, the past does not need to exist, to the Quantum Self, that is not beholden to the Samskaras of conditioned and congealed thought, to space or time but has access to all that is and all that happens as it happens and which underscores all our creativity and Quantum evolutionary capabilities. Also, good synopsis of the current state of physics and the current belief systems prevailing in the world at present from (i) Behaviorism to (ii) Materialism to (iii)Monistic Idealism , along with their limitations.
   
   Does not go that step further in understanding the metaphysical derivatives of Aspect's experiment, and in realizing that everything communicates instantaneously, only because space does not really fundamentally exist at all - and with it Time - which is just another aspect of the same illusion based on Minkowsky's elucidations! And so - there is no out-there - out there! The realization that everything and ever being is just subjective essence needs to be fully assimilated. A major affront to Science. Hui Neng's understanding that "From the beginning, not a thing is"! would be a further development! along with realizing that the entire seeming objective and object-orientated functionality of the universe is just a reflex of unpurified thought - also ACIM's Statement that "Objects leave not their Source" would help usher in the new metaphysics and the transcendental understanding and awareness needed to propitiate quantum leaps in mankind and the one joined and universal consciousness.
   
   The last section of the book, that deals with yoga and ethics is at best third rate. Reiterates OSHO, Krishnamurti and the basics of yoga! focuses on Eka Rupa and attaining the Eka Grata state in meditation as well as those of Samadhi with objects. Very fundamental but does not capitilize or deliver on the clever, well developed scientific statements that are their precursor earlier in the book.



5. The Holographic Universe
   
   If you're interested in new universal models based on quantum theories, I'd really recommend just picking up Michael Talbot's "The Holographic Universe." He essentially says the same thing, but his English is much easier to digest, and he manages to make quantum function seem as fascinating as it should to the layman, whereas Goswami tends to describe the same experiments in utterly boring, repetitive detail.

5 comments about Quantum Field Theory.

1. This book provides clear, explicit calculations and well presented examples. It uses a modern description and weaves the various aspects of this subject together in a coherent whole. Mark Srednicki has done a great job with this book.



2. I was at Caltech 1984-86 in Phd. theoretical physics program and they were still using Bjorken & Drell and then Ramond for the final quarter - I fell behind when we hit chapter 8 renormalization never caught up and to my regret dropped out and became a professional high limit poker player. Every few years I would buy another QFT text - I tried them all (Peskin & Schroeder, Ryder, kaku, Weinberg, Itzykson & Zuber, Hatfield, Zee)- learn a little but still never felt confortable with the subject. Then I discovered Prof. Srednicki's book on the internet and realized this is the book I have been waiting for. The subject is presented logically and coherently from a theorist point of view.
   
   Renormalization, path integrals etc. are all treated from the beginning with a toy phi-cubed theory. What other field theory book actually shows you the double taylor expansion as in 9.11 page 60 and then clearly explains all the symmetry factors and numerical factors that lead to the final feynman diagrams.
   
   The best part of the book is the problems - they are neither trivial nor research projects - so far I have worked almost every problem in part 1 (scalar fields)- and they are all instructive and doable. I particularly liked problem 10.5 on field redefinition - when you solve this one you know you understand the material on feynman diagrams and scattering amplitudes.
   
   The treatment of scalar fields followed by spinor fields and then gauge fields enables one to learn the subject and gain confidence without overwhelming you with all the technical details and indices at once.
   
   The only other book that compares with this one are Weinberg's which I would recommend tackling after Srednicki. I would also recommend Zee's nutshell book for those like myself who read QFT books for fun.



3. This is a useful book. For the first section he is mostly doing phi^3
   theory in 6 dimensions, which is unrealistic but good because he can
   touch on all the crucial concepts like renormalization, and asymptotic
   freedom in this simple context, making them as understandable as possible.
   He never sweeps subtleties under the rug, so you really learn how they
   arise. And he is careful with factors of i and 2 etc, so you have
   confidence that there is really a coherent story to follow, and it is
   worth your time to work things out for yourself. (Lots of misprints,
   but a well-maintained web page lists them.)
   
   Things I found less convenient:
   
   1) There is only one level of structure: short chapters. There are no
   sub-sections in chapters to make the logic clearer. And he refuses to
   ever cite any equation from another chapter, so either he repeats
   equations unnecessarily, or just cites a whole chapter, leaving you to
   search it for the relevant equation. And so there is no single place
   where all the crucial results are collected. Each time you need a
   basic formula you have to search through the book for it.
   
   2) Charged scalar fields are important as a precursor to fermions
   but are only studied in the problems. In phi^3 the field is neutral.
   
   3) Symmetry factors are never properly explained. There is a detailed
   discussion on real-space Feynman diagrams, but then suddenly he
   switches to momentum space, and we never learn how to do symmetry
   factors for an arbitrary momentum-space diagram.



4. Quantum Field Theory by Mark Srednicki is a true gem. He posts a (beta)pdf of the text on his website so you can see for yourself. However, In the words of John Baez: "nothing beats sitting in a cafe with a friend, notebooks open, and working together on a regular basis." So get the book, work through the problems, and (as much as possible) discuss them with a buddy over coffee. Cheers to good physics.



5. Background: I used this book in an introductory graduate course in QFT at Brown University, but I had read through a couple of other QFT texts before taking this course.
   
   The book is split into three main sections: 1) scalar fields 2) spinor fields and 3)vector fields. By developing QFT exclusively for scalar fields in the first section, Srednicki is able to separate the difficult parts of field theory from the complications and technicalities of spinor algebra, which was very helpful for me.
   Also, this approach allows the author to discuss some subtle aspects of quantum field theory much earlier on than usual (for example: effective field theories, Wilsonian renormalization, the renormalization group, spontaneous symmetry breaking, etc...). In particular, the book contains the best introduction to renormalization that I have seen. It takes a very modern standpoint, and was able to clear up many of my conceptual issues with the topic.
   There are a couple of other features/issues that the potential reader should probably be aware of:
   1) While the book introduces canonical quantization, it develops most of the material through the path integral formulation
   2) Srednicki develops spinor algebra using two-component Weyl spinors, which in my opinion is more elegant and useful for studying SUSY (but which may bother those who are used to the 4-component Dirac notation)
   3) The material is presentated through a large number of short (usually 3-4 page) chapters, which allows the author to cover a lot, but not always in great detail. Therefore (as with any QFT text), I would recommend supplementing the sections of this book with other texts (personally, I found Srednicki's informal approach complemented Weinberg's texts well)

5 comments about Dr. Quantum's Little Book Of Big Ideas: Where Science Meets Spirit.

1. Physicist Fred Alan wolf (a.k.a. Dr. Quantum) is respected among scientists and spiritual leaders alike for his ability to bridge spiritual with science concerns and insights, and his latest DR. QUANTUM'S LITTLE BOOK OF BIG IDEAS: WHERE SCIENCE MEETS SPIRIT is no exception, drawing important links between physics discoveries and theories and their meaning to and impact upon religious thought. A 'little book' format pairs vignettes and short reflections with longer essays on concepts of sources of inspiration and new ideas, charged particle 'dancers', and more. A fun recommendation for any interested in science.
   
   Diane C. Donovan, Editor
   California Bookwatch



2. I've been reading Fred Allen Wolfe's books on quantum physics for years now. My wife if very curious and fascinated but finds it hard to just jump into his books. Along comes Dr. Quantum which does not overwhelm the reader but does seduce the reader ever so cleverly into wanting to learn more and to take the time to stay with the more complicated full volumes. We actually (Pardon us, Fred) use it as a bathroom reader which gives us the chance to begin the day with something really fun and challenging with which to begin the day. We cannot recommend it highly enough youngsters and for adults who want to begin to learn about quantum physics. Now, if only Michio Kaku would put together a similar volume!



3. This is the BEST little book!!! I find myself ordering more and more copies for my friends and family (who love it too). I highly recommend it.



4. I was recommended this book by my Buddhist teacher, Sensei Anthony Stultz, and I was not disappointed. Sensei Tony uses a lot of quantum stuff to communicate Buddhist ideas and he said that "Dr. Quantum" was one of his favorites. I highly recommend it and Sensei's book, FREE YOUR MIND.



5. Want to challenge or change some of your beliefs or points-of-view?
   Read this one.

5 comments about Modern Quantum Mechanics (Revised Edition).

1. Pretending to be rigurous, this book doesn't even mention Hilbert Spaces, Riesz Lemma, The Spectral Theorem... all of which are key to the formalism of Quantum Mechanics. Many decades have passed since the serious development of the mathematical tools (non-existent by the time Dirac published his book) needed for QM was made. This book totally snubs mathematics (as many physicists still do).
   (And no, I'm NOT a mathematician).



2. I should mention, first of all, that I'm a mathematician and not a physicist. As such, I'm mostly interested in the formalism and mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics and, while Sakurai's treatement of the physics is superb, the treatment of the mathematics is not. The notation is horrific, and the derivations of the important results are not always completely clear. I, of course, do not expect this to be a book on mathematics (there are some books out there that try not to sacrifice any mathematical rigor at all, and this detracts from the physics so much that those books are rendered useless), but there is a balance that can be struck out, and this book doesn't achieve it.
   
   Despite the text's wholesale abuse of mathematics, the material presented in Sakurai's text should be mastered by anyone attempting any work in quantum mechanics (and if you choose this as your field, it isn't likely that you'll be given a choice about using Sakurai anyway). The exercises are extremely challenging and relevant, and the treatment of perturbation methods is excellent. It makes an excellent follow-up to an introductory course on quantum mechanics, particularly if you are actually a physicist.
   
   I should add that I do agree with everyone else here: the typsetting is pretty ugly. While the book has its merits, I don't think it warrants the three digit price tag. Personally, I'd find a used copy.
   
   [Edit, 02/13/07]: Bad binding jobs have become the bane of my existence. Since purchasing this book a year ago, it has seen regular (but extremely polite) use. Despite my care in my daily book handling, the first and last signatures of my copy have fallen out. If this is an indicator of the quality of this printing, it makes it all the more important to find a used copy for yourself.



3. This book is an excellent resource for the graduate student in physics. It covers many of the advanced topics like path integrals, etc. In the downside, it barely skims over some of the most important topics like the hydrogen atom.



4. Buy this book, if you are going to write a textbook and want to know how to not write a textbook. Otherwise don't waste your time trying to read this book.
   
   There are only 2 possibilities:
   1. Either you are already an expert in which case you don't need this.
   2. Or for the vast majority who are trying to learn, this is totally useless without a teacher.
   
   I am trying to read this book for 2 years. Everytime I try to read it, it leaves me with frusturation.
   Many books on physics I bought after this, I am able to move forward. Examples: 1) Gravitation [MTW] 2) Road to reality [Roger penrose]
   
   1. There is no motivation given for any of the chapters or sections. e.g. One chapter starts with Lippmann Schwinger eq. No explanation on why it is important, what it is solving etc.
   2. Notation is horrible. e.g. x', x''' etc. and they are not derivatives!
   3. Derivations skips steps liberally, reverses the left and right hand sides of the eq. suddenly. e.g. formal development of perturbation.
   4. It just has no approach to presentation. Many results are arrived at by weak analogy to something else at best. At worst they just pop out, out of nowhere. e.g. why we use bra, ket in very first chapter! optical theorem.
   5. There is no axiomatic approach or gives no clue as to why we are doing something in a particular way as opposed to some other way. e.g. perturbation theory
   
   I at last came to my senses,and going to buy some other book on Quantum mechanics.
   One lesson I learned, just because you bought some book, don't try to read it. if it doesn't feel right, change to a different book fast.



5. This is the "primary" textbook for my current graduate QM course, and I have to say it is bad even by graduate text standards. All of the grad students and professors that I've spoken to about this book cringe at the thought of taking a course with it. I do not expect a textbook at the graduate level to hold my hand and spell everything out for me, but this book actually grabs you by the hand to hold you back. The notation is baffling, and seems to have been conceived of in its own little world. It does not even remotely resemble the fairly widely accepted notations most people would come to expect. For this reason primarily I do not use this textbook for the purposes of the course other than to do homework problems. The writing itself is in the typical fashion: "It is clear that", "It can be shown that", "It is left to the reader to verify" etc etc. I could live with this, except that the lack of overall detail makes it difficult to verify much of anything. Lots of equations, little to no explanation. The reason for all this: Sakurai died and his notes were adapted (poorly) into a textbook. The man didn't write the book, and it shows. Instead I use the Gasiorowicz book, terrible for undergrad work which is what I had it for, but now I can really appreciate it as one of the better texts on the graduate level. I would recommend it instead if you have a choice.
   
   I suggest finding the lowest price possible on this book (i.e. $20 or so). Its not even useful as a reference due to the notation issues and the apparent lack of a useful index.
   
   On the plus side, the solutions are readily available online and these can really help you learn through example.
   
   Otherwise, pure garbage

5 comments about Quantum Physics: A Beginner's Guide.

1. I like how it breaks things down into subcategories, it's kind of like an overview of physics. If you want to know what quantum physics covers and not get into too much detail about the subject this is the book for you. In this sense it is a beginner's guide. It doesn't break things down into simpler ways of understanding but covers very basic ideas of quantum physics.



2. I read a review in which the reviewer said he reads 5 books a year and that makes him an authority. That made me chuckle. I think Einstein himself said, he was no Einstein.
   
   I've read about 3 dozen books on physics and math in the last 2 years and this one is another one I am happy to add to my list. Alastair Rae has the gift of not talking down to the reader. What I particularly like are the summaries and notes at the end of each chapter; it just seems to tie everything together. The book has mathematical boxes throughout, which can be skipped by the reader and still manage to get the over-all message. I would however recommend trying the math. If you are a little vague on math, try reading 'Basic Technical Mathematics with Calculus' by Allyn J. Washington and 'Precalculus Demystified' by Rhonda Huetenmueller.
   I did and it gave me a good mathematical background. I would as well, recommend studying classical physics too.
   
   All in all, Rae offers a good introduction to quatum for those who are new to the field, as well as a refresher for anyone with experience.



3. I really appreciate how the book is written in simplistic terms that most will be able to understand. It has truly explained the reasons for certain reactions in my world. It's easy to understand and remember.



4. Though the book is Ok, after reading Isaacs Asimov "Understanding Phisics" I expected more clarity from this book.



5. Overall, I definitely got what I wanted out of this book. For those of you who want a mathy approach to the subject, this is probably not the book for you. I know very little about the subject, so I wanted a book that would enable me to get a big picture so I could tell if a certain aspect of quantum physics interests me. This book serves that function well.
   
   No direct reflection on the author, but there are a number of significant numerical errors in the first chapter or so. They are almost certainly due to poor typesetting, I'm sure the author can tear up the math.

5 comments about An Introduction To Quantum Field Theory (Frontiers in Physics).

1. Hi there!
   
   The important information first: I'm a graduate student, mainly interested in theoretical physics. At the moment, I'm trying to get a deeper understanding of QFT.
   
   Peskin's QFT book is NOT the one you should buy if you want to UNDERSTAND renormalization.
   
   I learned the basics of QFT (\phi^4 and QED up to a first contact with renormalization - "trivial" subtraction of infinities) in a lecture and I finally felt like: "What does renormalization mean? What is it good for? Is there a deeper truth in it?" Well, the answer to the last question is definitely yes. It's about the Beta function. This function tells you how the coupling constants of a QFT behave at different momenta. E.g., we can learn from it why perturbation theory works for QED at low energies and for QCD at high energies (I think, this is amazing).
   
   What I just said I learned from Huang's book. Peskin "deals" with it in chapters 10 to 12. In the middle of chapter 12 I finally said to myself: "Hey, don't feel stupid. This book is just completely incomprehensible here."
   
   In my opinion, if you want to see behind renormalization (and therefore behind any QFT(!!)), don't buy Peskin's book. Any other book is better regarding this issue.



2. Ok--I just need to help lower the overall rating for this book. I think the people who love it are professors and students who already are familiar with QFT--because it glosses over everything, does pertinent examples, etc. But that's just it, it GLOSSES over everything. Note that nearly all the higher reviews say things like: "oh, you wouldn't want to start with this book." or "Everyone knows that you're going to need more books than this one to understand it . . ." I couldn't even figure out how to create a Feynmann diagram from this book, let alone what one MEANT. FYI, my favorite QFT book so far is Weinberg's Quantum Theory of Fields.



3. I received the book as it should be: knew. And it cames before the estimated time.



4. even years later now i still really dont like this book.
   there is a gap in 1st year grad courses and this book.
   Among other things i specifically dont like:
   1) there is a shallow discussion of lie algebras
   2) The notation can leave a newcomer confused in a field where clarity is essential to pedagogy
   3) field theory isnt just QED and the standard model
   4) there is a lack of nonperturbative topics
   5) lack of fancier math
   6) quantization is done entirely wrong, as if [x,p]~i came from nowhere. which leads to a convoluted (albeit original) tour through quantizing a dirac field
   7) often the diagram and value of it are just stated in clever time and space saving ways which is detrimental to pedagogy again...
   ...the list goes on
   
   I prefer:
   1) ryder was easy for me to read when i started
   2) bertlmann "anomalies" which is a book about much more than that
   3) makeenko
   4) A. Zee's tour of QFT
   5) for getting into nitty gritty i liked ho kim an pham's particles book.
   
   there are a lot of other good choices. mandl n shaw, srednicki, lowell brown's book, pokorski's, the whole series by greiner...those are also better in my view.
   
   i think people only use this book because peskin is well known. the book doesnt have much merit from my perspective.



5. Having started reading QFT as an undergrad from textbooks like Mandl and Shaw, I was reluctant to use this one, even while it was the recommended textbook of a graduate course in field theory. The main reason for this was that Peskin and Schroeder (P&S) makes practically no effort to make contact with the rest of the (vast) literature on the subject. If you have read some other QFT book it is very-very difficult to go through P&S and vice-versa. I remember trying to use in some occasions this book for some calculation and ending up completely confused, because the notation and normalization conventions where different from everybody else. So after these first sad encounters I quickly dismissed it and decided to use other books for QFT instead.
   Unfortunately, P&S seemed to remain the standard reference and everybody else seemed to have read it, so from some point on, I decided to give it another chance, so I wouldn't feel I was intellectually isolated. Thus, I bought the book and spent a couple of months reading through most of the text. This time I decided to not just read the parts I considered new, but start from the very beginning and keep going, doing every in-between calculation. Surprisingly, this time I could understand what was going on and managed to advance very fast through the chapters.
   I realized though that my initial impression remained true. The book is very idiosyncratic in its presentation method and many topics are treated here in a way you won't find anywhere else. This can be actually very useful, if you have already some familiarity with the material and you want to gain some further insight.
   The chapters of P&S have an obvious flaw though, which is why I couldn't follow the text on my first attempt: They are not at all self-contained. The book will present some small, one paragraph argument, which at the particular point seems rather tangential to what you are reading, then 400 pages latter, in a different chapter and subject, there comes a reference to that argument which now appears to be of outmost significance. So, you have to go back and see what is it that you missed. Apparently, unless you are reading the book without stop and start to finish, there is no way to avoid these frustrating self-references (and even if you are reading full-time, it takes about two weeks to advance 400 pages and by that time, you have most certainly forgotten half of the things you 've read). Many chapters suffer from the same problem and this renders the book almost useless as a reference, Every time you have to look up something which is a little more advanced than the Dirac equation, you end up encountering some reference to a previous passage, which then references another and so one, until you have to read again half of the book to find what you where looking for.
   There are also parts where an argument on a subject (like the Ward-Takahashi identity) can extend through many chapters and many pages. It is not uncommon in P&S to find discussions which continue for more than 10 pages. By the time you reach the end, you have almost forgotten what you where trying to prove in the first place. And this is another problem of the book. It has a tendency to present subjects which are in fact difficult and obscure as long discussions, without giving a hint in the beginning about what the result will be and expecting from the reader to make up his own mind about what actually has happened over the past 10 pages. Even when the exposition is interesting and engaging, it still may leave the reader perplexed in the end. The book also makes no distinction between which parts are "considered" easy and those that are supposed to be more difficult. This is very frustrating for the reader, since he may end up struggling too much over an easy part for no reason, then the next moment not paying the attention needed to truly follow a more profound section. It is always easier to learn once you are told what to expect.
   This trend seems to plague particularly the exposition of renormalisation techniques. P&S spends almost 200 pages discussing one-loop renormalisation in QED in chapters 6 and 7, then comes back to discuss renormalization more formally in Chapter 10, then 11 for renormalization with spontaneously broken symmetries, then 12 for the renormalization group. After nearly 400 pages or reading, you only have heard of Minimal and Modified Minimal Subtraction only once and in passing, without explanations or examples of how to use it. And for the record, after all this theoretical talking of renormalization, this is what you need the most in order to do some actual calculation of your own! Instead, you are left to more or less figure it out yourself after all these 400 pages.
   Having read almost the entire book, and having struggled to adapt to its notation, I thought I could at least use what I had just learned to read papers and do some research. Alas, the only papers I could read and understand using P&S, where those of Peskin! And of course, this is because everybody else doesn't use his notation. In a field as technical as QFT, notational conventions are very-very important and if you can't stick to a common language, you only make your life more difficult with no reason.
   Overall, I think there is no good evidence for someone to read this book and I am surprised this has become the standard reference on the subject. More surprising still, is the fact that the very professors who use it as recommended textbook in their courses of QFT almost never use its notation in their lectures or notes (from my experience in several universities, including the US). In my opinion, there is no all-encompassing textbook on QFT at the moment (Weinberg's trilogy also suffers from the same problem, it is very idiosyncratic). Maybe there will never be one again (like Bjorken and Drell once was), since the field has grown considerably over the years and has now become huge. So the only way to learn field theory is to read from many different books, depending on which has the best treatment for each topic. And in this case interoperability and notational consistency is far more worthwhile and rewarding than just striving for originality. Mandl & Shaw is perharps still the best introductory book and Bjorken & Drell has its merits. Greiner is the perfect reference for calculations on the early topics of field theory, like the Klein-Gordon, Dirac and Maxwell field and canonical quantization. His exposition of path integrals and the effective action is also a lot more coherent and to the point than P&S. Books on gauge theories like Aitchison & Hey, Huang and especially Cheng & Li are probably the best sources for more advanced topics on renormalization. Lie groups and the Standard Model. Leader & Predazzi also have a great chapter on the renormalization group. Coleman's lectures are also a must read. Finally, Zee's book is an excellent read if you actually want to know what it all really means.

5 comments about Quantum Physics and Theology: An Unexpected Kinship.

1. In this slim well written volume Polkinghorne gives us a succinct comparison of the rational processes of inquiry required in both quantum physics and Chistian theology. As he says in his preface if you're looking for a book on quantum physics he has written a different work treating that subject specifically. He has also written elsewhere about his Christian faith and theology. This book's real value lies in its encouragement towards further reading.
   
   Polkinghorne reaffirms his commitment to "critical realism" largely derived from Michael Polanyi. He then takes us on a fascinating journey of the intellectual history of quantum physics and theology. He draws a series of parallels in the two disciplines. Starting with a discussion of how science uses experience and understanding in the process of discovery he explains how the relationship between theory and experiment played a part in Einstein's development of the theory of relativity. That is paralleled by a discussion of how Christology is shaped by the historical record of Christ found in the Gospels. That supports his adoption of "bottom up" theology. This format is followed throughout the book - first discussing an aspect of the history of science and quantum physics followed with a history of some aspect of theology. Overall, this makes for some fascinating reading, if at times a little confusing as to exactly how these different histories are paralleled.
   
   Some of the scientific subjects covered are: the development of relativity, quarks, atomic structure, waves and particles, quantum indeterminacy and quantum field theory. The theological subjects include Christology, the historical Jesus, the incarnation, the doctrine of two natures, doctrine of the Trinity, miracles and eschatology. Polkinghorne finishes up with a discussion of some human aspects of intellectual inquiry such as the role of genius, insight, imagination, thought experiments and how the choice of words influences conceptual formulation.
   
   Polkinghorne's aim is to get scientists to appreciate the rational inquiry demanded of theological reflection and perhaps to do some reading in theology. Likewise, he encourages theologians to appreciate the intellectual rigor of scientific inquiry and to study science to see what that might add to their own theological formulations. I think this book succeeds in stimulating the reader in those directions.



2. The book is easy to read even though the complexity of the theme it works. Polkinhorne explores the connections between science and religion, making his point clear and easy to understand.



3. John Polkinhorne concedes that the existance of extra (space/time) dimensions is, as yet, unproven; what happens to our conciousness is also unproven in theology. He, nevertheless, offers sound logic that there must be a dynamic to perform transistion from this existance to the future. Since energy can neither be created nor destroyed it occurs that "super string" or no, some such dimensions are more than probable.
   
   Joseph Taylor



4. This is an excellent resource illustrating how science and Christianity are NOT mutually exlusive. Polkinghorne is a physicist and a "hard science" person as opposed to Diarmuid O'Murchu (Quantum Theology) who is a "soft science" person.
   
   Polkinghorne draws solid and substantiated paralells in the methods used by science and Christianity in their search for truth. This is much needed in our present culture where the constructed DUALISTIC split between science and religion prevails; that is, our culture tends to choose sides, EITHER science OR religion. Polkinghorne aptly illustrates that one can be both a scientist and a Priest as he is, or believe in science and religion.
   
   The only complaint I have is that at times Polkinhorne's tone is a bit uppity bordering on condescending. What I refer to here is illustrated in the preface when he explains why he did not title his book "Quantum Theology." He slams it as "quantum hype" and says it is really just indulgence in "paradox." I moved easily past this dig, which I perceived to be against O'Murchu, Social Psychologist and author of QUANTUM THEOLOGY, because Polkinghorne is a "hard scientist."
   
   That Polkinghorne is a "hard scientist" makes his work very methodical easy to follow, and the Christianity Science parallels unmistakable, even for the novice. That Polkinghorne is a priest probably lends to his openess to postmodern thought, that he is a physicist keeps him from "throwing the baby (scientific method) out with the bath water (some of the deification of science ineherent in much of modernity/enlightenment). I have never read a more clear and easy to follow book. This book is well worth the read and hopefully can lead to an even wider opening for the meeting of science and religion.



5. John Polkinghorne has written a book that will surprise and challenge many of its readers. In a neatly written and cogently argued case, he shows that there are many more similarities than one might have suspected between the goals and methods of the quantum physicist and those of the Christian theologian. He writes as an expert in both disciplines and his text is free of wild overstatement and contrived polemic. This is a book that charms and inspires and conveys a sense of authentic wonder at the astonishing creation of which we are a part.