Quantum Field Theory, Anthony Zee | Lecture 1 of 4

[@AlanCanon2222]

I sometimes wonder why I didn't have all this offered to me in the 1980s when I was a failing undergraduate. But it's been so long that now I realize that the dust hadn't quite settled on all of this by then. People were still working out how to teach it, and so forth.

[@accountone8315]

34:13 Path Integrals 46:52 Feynmann Diagrams 1:13:42 Mattress 1:17:30 Membrane 1:29:02 Gaussian Integral

[@wan3839]

I wasn't expecting much before watching this video, because while Zee's book was incredibly critically acclaimed, I personally found it very difficult to read. But then I watched this video and holy crap it's amazing! The book itself makes so much more sense now that I watched these lectures. Truly the lectures are fantastic, if only there were more. Btw this was a while ago, and now that I think back, while Zee's book is great you definitely don't want to use it as your first QFT book. I recommend learning the calculations through Peskin and Schroeder, and read Zee for some additional insights. Also check out David Tong's lectures on youtube. It's equally as good if not better (for one thing it is much longer).

[@greenfloatingtoad]

So far i like his book as a first. though there are a few places i wish he showed more steps, I feel like it efficiently shows me the big picture

[@hfelippejr]

these are great moments: 22:18 :-), and 24:18 "Weinberg's book can only be read by Weinberg; Weinberg himself told me this." oh my god, everything makes sense now: my imposter syndrome explodes whenever I'm reading Weinberg's QFT books.

[@LydellAaron]

I like that he links "life" several times. My own epiphany was that "a reaction implies perception," hinting at a base level consciousness. The maths won't say anything about "life" however. There's an energy and life connection somehow. Also by field, they mean having a complex tensor representation in a space. Photon and charge should have tensor representation because it also allows description of states. The best q symbol is koppa or Ϙ, ϙ or ϟ a now dead greek symbol for koppa. It represents a human head or electrical bolt.

[@nikhilm5461]

This is awesome ! I love the history ... And haha at 23 minutes, I always wondered why that picture was there on his text book. (sorry never read the preface) ...

[@BarriosGroupie]

He's a good lecturer; I hope he does one on classical mechanics

[@jacobvandijk6525]

About 6 years later you have 3 likes. Is he such a good lecturer???

[@viao4121]

now about its 10 like for 9 years, hope you do well and yes he such a good lecturer.

[@BarriosGroupie]

Wow THE Anthony Lee? He's an Asian version of Feynman: funny, witty and writes books to teach, rather than to show off his bright intellect.

[@jacobvandijk6525]

I couldn't disagree more with you.

[@abrogard]

25 minutes in. I like this guy. The best yet. Won't it be great if he can get something into my stupid head ! I'll get his book, too. :)

[@zeroonetime]

TIME begins and ends IN TIMING. 010 Creation, evolution ~ Entropy = 01 Creation.

[@waynelast1685]

Wish the video quality was better

[@cdenn016]

thank you thank you thank you. where was this when i took QFT in 2008?!

[@davidwilkie9551]

So a "pure" integral, (that seems like the first law of thermodynamics in practical terms?), is the holistic/energy amplitude context, and the matrices are the defining resonances/line emissions of the QF locii? And would the Quark Plasma energy "soup" in a Collider be a high frequency version of the same or similar properties of triple point chemistry? How is the Gauge theory involved? The mathematics and experiments are extremely complex but the core principles are recognizable? (Faraday style, you said) At the University I attended, the math prof said, "you just look at the question and TRY to guess a result", ...a long time ago, but using intuition hasn't changed much, it's become better recognized that it's the consequence of a lot of study of seemingly unrelated things that are actually parts of the connected universe. A string theorist might say that the number line represents a resonance sequence that can be either a string or cavity, so squishing the line to a point of loops of resonance/superposition, would be the situation from which the layers of membranes mentioned emerged, integrated. The (transverse/complex) loops of resonance timing are natural "perturbation" products and synchronized wave packages, reflected from the point cross section of the line/locus, so it's infinitely complex by self-definitio, but visible as emission spectra around the elements in stars etc, and it's easier to recognize such features that occur naturally than attempt to analyze the integral. However, specific applications of techniques, and machines of technology are the benefits. (virtue is its own reward?)

[@sigalig]

Amazing lecture. wow

[@2011sjw]

.......................................................I bought the "Nutshell" book.......but I don't have it with me right now, so maybe I can watch this...................thx kindly.

[@huanghan1911]

If he did not mention his book I certainly wouldn't even hear about it, and that would be a pity.

[@imperatoreTomas]

I love this

[@weishanlei8682]

I cannot see any words on the board!

[@aoflex]

+Weishan Lei It's probably nothing important...

[@thorcook]

I love the multi-colored/layered overhead transition effects.. He's discovered QFT but hasn't discovered PowerPoint yet? Very retro!

[@hagensteele4447]

Travis Cook Most of the lecture series I see on youtube fail to take advantage of video and audio technology to make any given subject matter more easily understood. Makes me think that the reason our scientific progress hasn't been more advanced is that our teaching methods basically suck.

[@SquattingErudite]

Try using PowerPoint for theoretical physics, you'll soon realize that it's not enough. Then you'll discover TeX tools to make presentations, but it won't be enough and you'll go back to the blackboard, literally. All those gimmicks, bells and whistles simply distract and rarely contribute anything to the learning process. The best teachers I've had the honor of listening to all used only chalk and blackboard.

[@metalkokorea]

his English pronunciation is superb.

[@hos84688]

thank you for very nice lecture. what QFT try to prove? what it correct to QM ?

[@aoflex]

Quantum mechanics describes the probabilistic nature of reality, particularly at small length scales. Quantum field theory combines quantum mechanics with special relativity, making it the most accurate theory of reality yet postulated. It's expected that there is a theory combining QFT and gravity (general relativity) that will provide insight into black holes, the big bang, cosmology, and particle physics. We don't have this theory yet.

[@hos84688]

Quantum field theory combines quantum mechanics with special relativity. what kind of combination is it ?

[@aoflex]

Quantum mechanics does not restrict the speed at which information can travel. Yet no information can travel faster than light in a vacuum. Enforcing special relativity on QM fixes this. You need to have some graduate physics courses under your belt before you can follow the mathematics. Then pick up books on QFT like amzn.to/1jwXiMm and amzn.to/1omw9Au and take a course online or in a class. KZbin is not a place to teach it:P

[@hos84688]

thank you a lot

[@mohammadkaraki4376]

Hosam Otaibi حج حسام من وين حضرتك؟

[@zoltankurti]

Yeah... deltaE ~ 1/deltat is not a thing in non-relativistic qm...

[@anybodynobody1827]

take a shot each time he says qft 😆

[@phillip76]

my background is insufficient to understand what the fuck is he saying.

[@ChielScape]

How can anyone teach this way?

[@rlemoyne007]

25 min intro is way too long.

[@drbonesshow1]

Poor guy's heads bobs up and down too much, reminds one of a day of fishing.

[@DavidBrown-om8cv]

"... Maxwell's theory contains two hidden symmetries ... one is relativity ... the other symmetry ... is gauge invariance ..." "... the question ... to ask ... whether it is conceivable that present-day theory also contains hidden structure that we don't anything about ..." Is Fredkin a genius? Is Wolfram a genius? Do the monster groups and the 6 pariah groups contain many symmetries that the string theorists have not yet understood? Consider the conjecture: Einstein's purely algebraic theory of nature = string theory with the finite nature hypothesis = Wolfram's cosmological automation defined by 4 or 5 simple rules and controlled by the monster group and the 6 pariah groups ... Are there 6 basic quarks because there are 6 pariah groups? Google "fredkin feynman", "wolfram feynman", "fredkin milgrom", "10 problems with dark matter - pavel kroupa youtube", and "Wolfram physics project".

[@2688jojo]

太棒了！

[@ryanblais6208]

Hen hao! 👍

[@pacajalbert9018]

Môj otec vedel chyba sa stane

[@RobboPGi]

This guy declares he's not promoting his book but the first part to this lecture, he took each and every opportunity to mention it, again and again and again ..... On top of that, if he wasn't pushing his book, he was talking about himself and name-dropping like a B-52 bomber. I got zero problem in Zee mentioning his book and himself but there's a limit to that and I'm afraid his ego got the better of him and he turned an extremely enlightening talk into a somewhat indulgent publicity exercise for himself. This guy is smart, no doubt about that but if you wish to integrate your own interests into such a lecture, then you better make sure you have a delivery like Feynman - he made self-promotion a 'fun thing' to watch and although he had an ego the size of a brane, he knew how to negotiate it and still remain entertaining and enlightening.

[@gbiota1]

But wasn't his book about the subject he was giving a lecture on, and wasn't it then used as a pretext to explain the different approaches to the subject? I feel like I'm pretty sensitive to pretense, but maybe you caught something I missed.

[@ruihaoli2295]

***** Did you ever read the book he mentioned? If you did, you would've not been bothered by that.

[@yuhangliu7451]

But his books are good.

[@dilbread]

Haven't you ever produced something you're proud of, that other people love, and want to promote? I guess not...!

[@davidwright8432]

It's only name-dropping if you aren't a member of the group., and you think he's trying to impress you. But he isn't; he's just mentioning colleagues, in ways relevant to his points. Strangely, he doesn't know that you - or I - even exist.

[@paulcampbell7518]

Early on he shows Einstein's equation, but calls it Schroedinger's - A bit disconcerting!

[@arkitson]

He refers to Schrödinger's equation by name alone (assuming that the audience is already familiar with it). The first equation is Heisenberg's and the second is Einstein's. Together they suggest that matter and anti-matter can be created over tiny time scales, which doesn't agree with Schrödinger's equation.

[@eyebee-sea4444]

Teaches Quantum Field Theory, but doesn't know how to turn on a overhead projector.

[@ingenuity168]

🤣😂🤣

[@the13thTone]

This is actually common

[@gmcenroe]

what is funny is that he is still using transparencies instead of power point, but it is an excellent lecture anyway.

[@jacobvandijk6525]

Reading the reactions he didn't make himself popular. To busy with himself, I think. He likes France, so I call him "Feynman XIV".

[@antoniomantovani3147]

Not serius he's not a teacher