Mathematical Quantum Field Theory - Geometry - Comments

[Urs Schreiber]

Greg Bernhardt submitted a new PF Insights post

Mathematical Quantum Field Theory - Geometry

Continue reading the Original PF Insights Post.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Part 3 will be released tomorrow!

 

[strangerep]

I encounter some non-rendered latex in Definition 1.7 (sections) and Example 1.8 (trivial bundle).
Anyone else seeing this?

[Edit:] In Definition 1.14. sub-para "1": Typo? ##dx^j## in 2nd line should be ##dx^i## ?

 

[Urs Schreiber]

I encounter some non-rendered latex in Definition 1.7 (sections) and Example 1.8 (trivial bundle).
Anyone else seeing this?

[Edit:] In Definition 1.14. sub-para "1": Typo? ##dx^j## in 2nd line should be ##dx^i## ?

Thanks. I fixed the indexing in Def. 1.14 now. I am not sure yet what is causing the two rendering issues. Will investigate...

 

[strangerep]

I am not sure yet what is causing the two rendering issues. Will investigate...

Some diagrams which work ok contain:

\downarrow\substack{fb}

But both the faulty ones have: \downarrow^\substack{fb}

 

[Urs Schreiber]

Some diagrams which work ok contain:

\downarrow\substack{fb}

But both the faulty ones have: \downarrow^\substack{fb}

Thanks again. Yes, that's what triggers the problem. I have removed the "substack", and now it displays.

But an issue remains. The use of "substack" here is a hack anyway. It replaces what in my source is "mathrlap" or "mathllap", neither of which seem to be supported here. If anyone has a suggestion, please let me know.

 

[vanhees71]

It's offtopic a bit, because it's about technical things, but I'd suggest Greg should also admit collections of pdf's as Insights. Then it would be much easier to write Insights of such typographically challenging texts simply in LaTeX. The greatest obstacle writing Insights articles for me are these technical problems!

 

[Urs Schreiber]

It's offtopic a bit, because it's about technical things, but I'd suggest Greg should also admit collections of pdf's as Insights. Then it would be much easier to write Insights of such typographically challenging texts simply in LaTeX. The greatest obstacle writing Insights articles for me are these technical problems!

I know what you mean. On the other hand, with the script that some kind soul has written for me (who prefers to remain anonymous), 99% of the technical problems have now gone away (for conversion from Instiki to Wordpress that is, but something analogous could be done for conversion from LaTeX to Wordress.) I am confident that the last remaining little issues as above will be sorted out.

 

[Urs Schreiber]

But an issue remains. The use of "substack" here is a hack anyway. I replaces what in my source is "mathrlap" or "mathllap", neither of which seem to be supported here. If anyone has a suggestion, please let me know.

Found the solution! Turns out that the functionality of "mathrlap" and "mathllap" is supported here after all, but it needs to be called just as "rlap" and "llap".

Now everything works! (Or so it seems, please let me know if you spot further issues.)

 

[thephystudent]

Thanks for sharing this very interesting guide which you clearly took very seriously!

I actually think pdf-notes would be more comfortable to read (and more printer-friendly as well) though, especially on complex subjects like this.

 

[vanhees71]

I know what you mean. On the other hand, with the script that some kind soul has written for me (who prefers to remain anonymous), 99% of the technical problems have now gone away (for conversion from Instiki to Wordpress that is, but something analogous could be done for conversion from LaTeX to Wordress.) I am confident that the last remaining little issues as above will be sorted out.

Still I prefer pdf's, particularly since I'm still preferring to print out manuscripts like this on paper. I'm a digital immigrant!

 

[Urs Schreiber]

There is two different things you could be asking for here:

1. A single-file pdf version of the series formatted as is.
   
2. A reformatting in standard LaTeX style compiled to a pdf.

I'll provide the former when the series is finished. For the latter we would need somebody offering to write a conversion tool that would convert my source code to LaTeX.

 

[vanhees71]

As long as the pdf is as readable as the website and formatted in a way that it can be printed out nicely, I don't care with which tool it is created. Thanks anyway for all this work. I have to struggle to keep up reading and have negative available time at the moment :-(.

 

[A. Neumaier]

There is two different things you could be asking for here:

1. A single-file pdf version of the series formatted as is.
   
2. A reformatting in standard LaTeX style compiled to a pdf.

I'll provide the former when the series is finished. For the latter we would need somebody offering to write a conversion tool that would convert my source code to LaTeX.

I tried to print some articles from your sequence using the browser's print facility (from chrome), and the result was very poor...

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I tried to print some articles from your sequence using the browser's print facility (from chrome), and the result was very poor...

One of the main issues is that all the keyword text links turn into URL address links. Makes it almost unreadable.

 

[A. Neumaier]

One of the main issues is that all the keyword text links turn into URL address links. Make it almost readable.

This makes it almost unreadable as there happen to be lots of links!

To be readable, each link should be replaced in the print version by a reference such as [3], and at the end of the article the reference numbers should be listed together with their link:
[3] http://xxxx.yy...

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

This makes it almost unreadable as there happen to be lots of links!

To be readable, each link should be replaced in the print version by a reference such as [3], and at the end of the article the reference numbers should be listed together with their link:
[3] http://xxxx.yy...

Right, that is what I meant. There are some things I can try. Be back later to report.

 

[A. Neumaier]

There are some things I can try

maybe you can make a button that generates a print version. In this case it would be useful to have a choice whether one wants to have all links simply suppressed, or listed in the way suggested above.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

maybe you can make a button that generates a print version. In this case it would be useful to have a choice whether one wants to have all links simply suppressed, or listed in the way suggested above.

Working on that now. First try looked good but now the latex doesn't render.

 

[A. Neumaier]

Working on that now. First try looked good but now the latex doesn't render.

Also, the pdf for the above Insight article has the leading table truncated.
Please place the print/pdf button at the top!

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Also, the pdf for the above Insight article has the leading table truncated.
Please place the print/pdf button at the top!

PDF conversion won't work because it won't render the latex. I'll have to find a friendly print option.

 

[vanhees71]

This brings up again my older suggestion to allow also to reach in Insight articles as pdf. Then the author can choose his or her preferred way of writing (LaTeX or even, horribile dictu, Word & Co) and provide a well readable and printable pdf. In the best of all worlds one should have both the pdf and the html version.

I think a way to provide the latter, using LaTeX should be the following: One types LaTeX and at the end translates via query replace to the format (I still don't know what it is, mathjax, WordPress, or something else?) of the Insights editor. The only quibble is that one has to provide also a list of private macro definitions used in the LaTeX. So it's perhaps a bit of cumbersome work to get the final Insights html version to look right.

 

[eys_physics]

I fully agree with the suggestion by vanhees71. It would be very nice if at least some of the Insight articles could be read as pdf, at least the ones containing many equations.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I fully agree with the suggestion by vanhees71. It would be very nice if at least some of the Insight articles could be read as pdf, at least the ones containing many equations.

This is not easily possible as the latex is rendered by the web browser

 

[Urs Schreiber]

At the very least, I know how to produce a readable single-file pdf from my source, formatted as web-display, but readable. I'll provide that when the series is finished.

But I am also in contact with people who think about looking into proper LaTeX conversion of my source. With a little luck, this will work out.

 

[thephystudent]

I am far from an experienced senior like you guys, but wouldn't it be a good idea to put these articles on the arXiv and link to them?

I don't think that means downplaying PhysicsForums; on the contrary if the article's headers clearly mention the link to PF I think it could be great publicity for the forum.

 

[Urs Schreiber]

wouldn't it be a good idea to put these articles on the arXiv and link to them?

I don't think that means downplaying PhysicsForums; on the contrary if the article's headers clearly mention the link to PF I think it could be great publicity for the forum.

That might be an idea. But if the goal is to make publicity for PF, maybe that would better be served if PF is the exclusive host of this material?

 

[dextercioby]

That might be an idea. But if the goal is to make publicity for PF, maybe that would better be served if PF is the exclusive host of this material?

I agree. Your work is to the benefit of this heterogenous community and we should keep it here. I see arxiv as a repository for research paper drafts. Your notes are singular (in the sense that the material in them is nowhere else to be seen), so this part of research work is retained, but, unless you plan to sell this material to Springer Verlag, we would like to have it here. Indeed, a pdf with active links to your encyclopedic website would be ideal, as it would offer immediate, unlimited offline access to the contents. I told you, I plan to print them, study them and store them in my physical library alongside other teasures.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

That might be an idea. But if the goal is to make publicity for PF, maybe that would better be served if PF is the exclusive host of this material?

I agree. Your work is to the benefit of this heterogenous community and we should keep it here.

Obviously we cherish our Insight authors and their unique contributions to our community. But just to be clear, our authorship guidelines do grant authors the freedom to publish elsewhere after publishing on PF.

 

[mattt]

Below definition 1.6 (bundles) it shows: [tex] fb_2 \circ f = fb_2 [/tex] and it should be [tex] fb_2 \circ f = fb_1[/tex]

Also in definition 1.7 (sections) it shows: [tex]fb \circ f = id_X[/tex] and it should be [tex]fb \circ s = id_X[/tex]

 

[Urs Schreiber]

Below definition 1.6

Thanks! Fixed now.

 

[mattt]

By the way Urs, I am just starting to review this fantastic series of yours on mathematically rigorous Relativistic Perturbative Quantum Field Theory, and I think it is one of the best things that has happened on physicsforums in a long time, so thank you dearly for that! ( and keep them coming! )

 

[strangerep]

By the way Urs, I am just starting to review this fantastic series of yours on mathematically rigorous Relativistic Perturbative Quantum Field Theory, and I think it is one of the best things that has happened on physicsforums in a long time,

Heh, great to hear. Maybe one day you can explain it in simpler terms to the rest of us rubes.