Enjoy my content? Consider supporting NHU at patreon.com/nickheumann If you want to see a specific video topic, you can start or support a petition using ablebees! www.ablebees.com/team/nickheumannuniversity Also, join our community discords server, where you can ask questions and find other students to study with! discord.gg/vXJHWvC6MJ
At 14:25 the normalization constant for the 4-dim Fourier transform is either (2\pi)^(4/2) in some textbooks or in other ones it is (2\pi)^4. Why in your presentation it is (2\pi)^(3/2) ?
Very useful video! But I believe there was a minus sign missing in the definition of p at 18:50, then obtained [a,a+] = 1 because what was done was [p,x] instead of [x,p].
for 6:32 it must be one if the coordinates are the same and 0 if the coordinates are not the same? so why did you put a dirac delta if when x = y in the dirac delta it blows up to infinity. HELPPPP
Yes I don't understand, it happens at 53:06. Before, we had phi(x) time dependant in the exponentials (we see it when we derive phi with respect to time to get pi). But with the change of notations, we have trivectors product in the exponentials, I don't see where goes t ? Phi isn't time dependant anymore ?
Quantum Field Theory and the Standard Model by Matthew D. Schwartz. But I think learning for lecture notes is much easier, Eg: Lecture notes of David Tong and Sidney Coleman
Enjoy my content?
Consider supporting NHU at
patreon.com/nickheumann
If you want to see a specific video topic, you can start or support a petition using ablebees! www.ablebees.com/team/nickheumannuniversity
Also, join our community discords server, where you can ask questions and find other students to study with!
discord.gg/vXJHWvC6MJ
I'm just here because it was recommended to me by the youtube algorithms. It's nice to refresh the memories.
Excellent lecture!
Thank you
53:27 How do we get rid of time components? Why we can do that?
P.S. Thank you for great vids
At 14:25 the normalization constant for the 4-dim Fourier transform is either (2\pi)^(4/2) in some textbooks or in other ones it is (2\pi)^4. Why in your presentation it is (2\pi)^(3/2) ?
Very useful video!
But I believe there was a minus sign missing in the definition of p at 18:50, then obtained [a,a+] = 1 because what was done was [p,x] instead of [x,p].
Yes, that's right
thanks man it world class education for free
thank you! that's my goal
Excellent video, very usefull!
thank you!
@53:30 the 4-vector "k" is transferred to the 3-vector "p" - magic ? why can we do that ? Is the (energy*time) now 0 ?
can you explain the 4 gradient acting on exp and somehow getting the frequency and not the wave number k squared?
8:36 should the gradients have also a half factor?
Hell yes! Thank you!
Why do you write capitals
Like x and pie
Does that mean something
Can we write in small letters?
Great vid!
for 6:32 it must be one if the coordinates are the same and 0 if the coordinates are not the same? so why did you put a dirac delta if when x = y in the dirac delta it blows up to infinity. HELPPPP
But the pi momentum should be defined as DL/D(d mu phi)...?
When you change notations, isnt there a exp(-ik_o x_o) missing? ( which would be exp(-Et) then)
Yes I don't understand, it happens at 53:06. Before, we had phi(x) time dependant in the exponentials (we see it when we derive phi with respect to time to get pi). But with the change of notations, we have trivectors product in the exponentials, I don't see where goes t ? Phi isn't time dependant anymore ?
@@darkkevindu6982 Same question.
why QFT is so damn harddd!!!
could anyone recomend me some basics books for it?
Quantum Field Theory and the Standard Model by Matthew D. Schwartz. But I think learning for lecture notes is much easier, Eg: Lecture notes of David Tong and Sidney Coleman
It would be much easier to read if you used a black pen rather than a blue pen...🙂
Otherwise, good video...
200th like 👍
Two weeks and I'll learn your whole channel ♡
I’m hoping to do it in 6 months. 😮