# Errata of Weinberg's QFT textbooks, 2005 edition.

+ 3 like - 0 dislike
3574 views

I just compiled a personal collection of errata of the 2005 paperback edition(pdf file at the bottom of my webpage). I found almost no typos in Volume 1 but quite a bit in Volume 2, and I'm only halfway reading Volume 2. I hope to see answers that make the errata more complete. In addition to typos kind of mistakes, you are more than welcomed to show where Weinberg "cheats" the readers, for example, claims to have derived something but forgets to mention some subtle assumptions that slipped in.

edited Mar 18, 2015

@ArnoldNeumaier, I've now updated the errata, with a disclaimer that I have not  verified B.D. Keister and W.N. Polyzou.

Not yet an answer, but maybe worth a comment: I started reading the Volume 1, and find it a good read form the very beginning -- also because I'm interested in the historic development. However, I found some references in Chapter 1 to be incorrect. Worth an answer?

Examples from Chapter 1, References:

10a. A. Sommerfeld, Munchner Berichte 1915, pp. 425, 429; Ann. Phys.
51, 1, 125 (1916). Also see W. Wilson, Phil. Mag. 29, 795 (1915).

-> The second reference should be page 459.

19. W Pauli, Z.f. Phys. 37, 263 (1926); 43, 601 (1927).

-> The first article is authored by W. Heisenberg and P. Jordan.

@vivienzo

Sure, why not?

+ 4 like - 0 dislike

The first chapter of Volume 1 contains an excellent and exhaustive set of references of the relevant papers (and proceedings). Unfortunately, there are quite some "glitches", where some of the references are incorrect or at least difficult to understand or investigate for.

Here is my errata list for the Chapter 1 references. In particular, I try to add a reference to the cited papers as often as possible. Some of the historic papers are actually freely available over internet. Others can at least easily be referenced by DOI.

answered Oct 20, 2018 by (0 points)
edited Oct 22, 2018 by vivenzio

I am not sure if these are typos, but I think they are:

Eq. 1.1.2 in Vol I of Weinberg: plus signs in 1st and 2nd terms in (), on the RHS, should be minus instead. This propagates to 1.1.4, and 1.1.5 also.

 Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead. To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL. Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post. This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button. Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview Your name to display (optional): Email me at this address if my answer is selected or commented on: Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications. Anti-spam verification: If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:p$\hbar$ysic$\varnothing$OverflowThen drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds). To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.