Well thanks HallsofIvy and dextercioby. So afterall Maple and Mathematica are right.
So what did I do wrong exactly in my steps using integration by parts? It should still give the same answer regardless of how it got there...
Hmm... Ok... I'm actually evaluating this within limits (from 0 to a constant b), but I was worried about the difference in the first term in the final result ("x" in my results and "a" in Mathematica/Maple).
I know not to trust Mathematica/Maple but it's rare that they both give me same...
Hi. I'm trying to do a simple integration, but I cannot seem to get it. Please help!
Homework Statement
\int\frac{xdx}{\left(x-a\right)^2}
Homework Equations
I'm simply using integration by part using:
\int udv = uv - \int vdu
with:
u=x \rightarrow du=dx...
Sakurai uses strictly ket notations. If you are never introduced to ket notations it might be a little hard to follow
QM by Bransden and Joachain uses classical notations which maybe familiar with more people.
If you have enough knowledge in Relativistic quantum mechanics, I've been told, that you can actually follow Peskin and Schroeder with a paper and pencil to work through what he does.
I recommend starting with Relativistic QM by Bjorken and Drell or Gauge theories by Aitchison and Hey (I assume...
Thanks tiny-tim.
It seems obvious that the audience for this book is not someone who wants to rigorously study this field of physics, which is fine since I have Peskin and Schroeder, which is THE book for QFT. As much as his (McMahon) mathematics in the book is not universal and not consistent...
Hi all,
I bought a book recently of this title. I wanted this one to compliment the field theory book I have already (Peskin and Schroeder) because I find the latter a little hard to follow on my own (I am currently taking Relativistic Quantum Mechanics and will be taking QFT course at some...
I'm assuming you're referring to the original post:
M+M^2=\frac{k}{v}
That was your mistake. If you did the correct math, the v does not vanish from left hand side as I showed in my last post:
M+\frac{M^2}{v}=\frac{k}{v}
Starting from
Mv+M^2=k
Dividing by v from both sides:
\frac{Mv}{v}+\frac{M^2}{v}=\frac{k}{v}
which simplifies to
M+\frac{M^2}{v}=\frac{k}{v}
And starting from
M+M^2=\frac{k}{v}
Taking M away from both sides:
M+M^2-M=\frac{k}{v}-M
Which simplifies to
M^2=\frac{k}{v}-M
M on the right hand side...
Isolate what?
Mv+M^2=k
Dividing both sides by v does not give you
M+M^2=\frac{k}{v}
and taking M away from both sides won't give you
M^2=\frac{k}{v} -1
I'm not sure what the objective of this question is, but your algebra is incorrect in Step 3 and step 4. What should the final answer look like? you want to find the kinetic energy of the system?
As chrisk suggested, the easy way is to divide both sides by (v+1) in first step.
Ultimately, this...
Hi, sorry for posting on an old thread.
I am a graduate student (MSc) in particle physics, and I am looking for a RQM/QFT book. My professor has suggested the following books and I was wondering which book would be the best choice:
Aitchison and Hey: Gauge Theories in Particle Physics
Itzykson...
Thanks for all of your help
I certainly understand more than I did, but not completely. I think it will become more clearer once I study field theory. For now, this is good enough.
Thanks again
Thanks Ben
You answered my question from mathematical point of view (don't get me wrong, it was very helpful), but what does it mean physically? The U(1) generator gives spin, SU(2) generator gives rotation... I believe the the other two generators comes from SU(3), but not sure what they are...