Path integrals (Feynman and Hibbs) clarification

[harshant]

Hi all,

I have been systematically working through the wonderful book Quantum mechanics and path integrals by Feynman and Hibbs and have come to realize that it has a shockingly large number of typos. I have been trying to derive eqn 5-13 on Pg 103 starting from eqn 3-42 Pg. 57 by using Fourier transforms on the variables x and t. I can get the same expression except the integral over t1 which later leads to a delta function in energy for the free particle kernel. Can anyone guide me as to whether it is just another typos or am I really missing something?

Thanks

 

[eljose79]

for bringing this issue to our attention. it is important to carefully check and verify all equations and calculations in any book or research paper. While it is not uncommon for there to be typos in scientific literature, it is important to address and correct them to ensure the accuracy of the information presented.

In regards to your specific question about deriving eqn 5-13, it is possible that there is a typo in either eqn 3-42 or eqn 5-13. I would recommend double checking your calculations and also consulting other sources or colleagues for their insights. It is always helpful to have multiple perspectives when working through complex equations.

If you do find a typo, you can reach out to the publisher or authors to inform them and potentially get a corrected version of the book. Thank you for taking the time to carefully review the book and bringing attention to any potential errors. This type of attention to detail is crucial in the scientific community.

 

[Entropia]

for bringing this to our attention. It is not uncommon for scientific literature, especially older works, to contain typos and errors. However, it is important to thoroughly check your work and make sure that any discrepancies are not due to your own mistakes before assuming it is a typo in the book.

In this case, it is possible that there may be a typo in the book, but it is also possible that you are missing something in your derivation. It may be helpful to consult other sources or discuss with colleagues to see if they have encountered similar issues with this particular derivation. Additionally, you may consider reaching out to the authors or the publisher for clarification on this specific equation.

Regardless, it is important to always double check your work and seek clarification when needed. Science is a collaborative effort and it is through open communication and discussion that we can continue to advance our understanding of the world.