Jump to content

QFT and the SM by Schwartz, checking


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Genady said:

Checking with the physicists here:

On the p.17 it says,


Shouldn't it say force rather than potential? Isn't any potential rather quadratic close to equilibrium?

Absolutely. It's an erratum. The potential is quadratic, so it's the force that's linear.

Close to equilibrium the Taylor expansion of the potential must be quadratic, as at the equilibrium position, the gradient (the force) must be zero. So the next-to-zeroth-order term for the force is proportional to V''(x0).


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.