Corrections to

Concepts of Elementary Particle Physics

by Michael E. Peskin

I hope that you are enjoying my textbook "Concepts of Elementary Particle Physics". It is meant to explain to students and other readers what the "Standard Model of Particle Physics" is, where it came from, and what the underlying principles of this model are.

The book does not assume prior knowledge of quantum field theory, but many principles of quantum field theory are discussed in the book using the easiest examples. The book stresses the point that the ideas of quantum field theory grew up in a manner intertwined with experimental discoveries about elementary particles. A full understanding of the fundamental laws of physics requires knowledge of both the theoretical and the experimental aspects. I hope that this book will provide an introduction to both sides of this subject.

Many of the principles, and, especially, the successes of the Standard Model are quite subtle. If you are a student and you learn something surprising, quiz your professors about it. Everyone can benefit from understanding the Standard Model better.

My textbook is now available in its 2nd printing. If you bought the book new in early 2024 or after, this is the edition that you will have. The 2nd printing corrects most of the errors previously listed on this page. I am grateful to many people for notifying me of errors, but I especially thank Andrzej Czarnecki and Samiur Rahman Mir at the University of Alberta for their very thorough and critical reading. For those people who have the first printing, the previous version of this page is available at this link.

No book by a human author is perfect. I am sure that further errors will require correction. Errors found in the book will be reported on this page. If you find an error, please email me (mpeskin"at"slac.stanford.edu), and I will post the correction here. I hope that these corrections will bring the book closer to that level of technical perfection that students long for but authors find so elusive.

• Frontmatter:
  • p. viii: In in the paragraph "SLAC." , line 3, "achivist" should read "archivist". (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
• Chapter 1:
• Chapter 2:
  • p. 10: The right-hand side of eq. (2.1) should read: "(E_p, vec p c)". In eq. (2.2), "E" should read "E_p" and "E'" should read "E'_p". In eq. (2.6) , the right-hand side should read "E_p E_q - vec p . vec q c^2". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 20: In eq. (2.57), in the third equation, the left-hand side "J^1" should read "J^3". (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
• Chapter 3:
  • p. 31: In eq. (3.32), the second line should read: "F^{ij} = del_i A^j - del_j A^i = epsilon^{ijk} B^k". (Thanks to Andrzej Czarnecki.)
  • p. 32: In Eq. (3.37), "-J^nu" should be replaced by "+J^nu". In Eq. (3.38), "J^mu" should be replaced by "J^nu". (Thanks to Andrzej Czarnecki and Francis Onah.)
  • p. 33: The first line of eq. (3.45) would be clearer if the right-hand side read : (i gamma^mu del_mu + m) (i gamma^nu del_nu - m) Psi. (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 34: In the line below eq. (3.53), "Exercise 3.4" should read "Exercise 3.3". (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
  • p. 38: The line above eq. (3.87) should read: "is not Lorentz-invariant. However, the integral (over positive energies, p^0 > 0)". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 41: In Exercise 3.4, part (c), line 2, "the vectors in (1)" should read "the vectors in part (b)". In part (d), line 3 below eq. (3.100), "(2)" should be removed. (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
• Chapter 4:
  • p. 45: in the first line below eq. (4.13), "the dynamics of spin in special relativity" should read "the transfomations of spin under boosts in special relativity". (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
  • p. 48: Just below eq. (4.33), "Rydberg" should read "Rydberg constant". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 45: In Exercise 4.3, part (d), line 4, "Show this this" should read "Show that this". (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
• Chapter 5:
  • p. 59: In the second line of the figure caption, "Jpsi" should read "J/psi". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 61: The paragraph beginning "Three intermediate states ..." is confusing. Here is a better explanation: First, please correct the Fig. 5.6 caption by adding the sentence: The High Solution gives the correct chi masses. See the text for more explanation. Then replace the last 2/3 of the paragraph in question by the following: " ... Fig. 5.6. The mass values on the horizontal axis are obtained by combining the momentum of the J/psi with that of the higher energy photon, assuming this is the photon emitted by the chi state. Notice that the spread in mass is narrow in all three cases. That shows that this is the correct association. The mass values on the vertical axis are obtained by combininng the momentum of the J/psi with that of the lower energy photon. With the assumption above, this photon was emitted in the transition from the psi' to the chi state. There is no reason why these two momenta should form a resonance." (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 66: The first two lines on the page should read: "having strangeness S = +1, their antiparticles having S = -1, and Lambda^0 having S = -1." Two lines below eq. (5.19), the sentence should read: "States with strangeness S = -1 will be assigned one s quark, and states with strangeness +1 will have one sbar antiquark." (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 68: The particles in the figures, eqs. (5.33) and (5.34), are actually, the anti-B or Bbar mesons. The B and B* mesons proper contain an b antiquark and a light quark (similarly to the K^0 and K^+). The names are correctly associated in with the quark content in Chapter 19. (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
  • p. 69: Eq. (5.39) should read "n -> p e^- nubar". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 72: In Eq. (5.54), the third term in the second line should read " - | u(down) d(up) u(up) >". This completes the pattern correctly. (Thanks to Stanford Broadwater.)
  • p. 74: In the first line after eq. (5.60), "meaure" should read "measure". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 75: In eq. (5.65), "m_p" should read "m_n". Actually, to the accuracy of this formula, either mass could be used. (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
• Chapter 6:
  • p. 78: In the first sentence of Section 6.1, "ioniziation" should read "ionization". (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
  • p. 80-81: In the two figures, eqs. (6.12) and (6.13), "dX" should read "dx". (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
  • p. 86: In the first paragraph, the material just above eq. (6.30) beginning "multiple scattering" should be replaced by "mutiple scattering. The root mean square angular deflection after a particle of charge Q has traveled a distance x through a medium is well approximated by" and the equation (6.30) itself should read " Delta theta = { 13.6 MeV/beta p } . |Q|. sqrt(x/X_0) ,"
• Chapter 7:
  • p. 97: In eq. (7.9), "A_B" should read "a_B" to be consistent with eq. (7.8). (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 99: In eq. 7.26), the final "." should be a ",". (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
  • p.101: In the first line below eq. (7.39), "andGammais" should read "and Gamma is". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 108: In Exercise 7.2, 3 lines below eq. (7.84), "Identify" should read "identify". (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
  • p. 108: In Exercise 7.3, in line 3 of part (b), "that that" should read simply "that". (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
• Chapter 8:
  • p. 124: Just under the figures, the quantity "sqrt(s)" equals the center of mass energy of the e+e- annihilation. This is a standard notation which, excuse me, is not explained until later, on p. 136. (Thanks to Susan Gardner.)
• Chapter 9:
  • p. 146: Please note that, in the Section 9.5, the momenta k,k' are used for the incoming and outgoing electrons and p, p' are used for the incoming and outgoing quarks. I apologize for any confusion. (Thanks to Andrzej Czarnecki.)
  • p. 147: In Exercise 9.2, part (c), line 3. "build" should read "built". (Thanks to Andrzej Czarnecki.)
• Chapter 10:
  • p. 150: The right hand sides in eq. (10.4) might be confusing. On p. 133, I defined a pdf f_i(x) as giving the probability f_i(x) dx of finding a parton i in a small interval of momentum dx. So you might find it strange that pdfs are not always normalized to 1. But if there are 2 u quarks in the proton, these probabilities should actually sum to 2 when summed over all x. This is the logic behind the normalization integrals given in eq. (10.4). (Thanks to Andrzej Czarnecki.)
• Chapter 11:
  • p. 170: In eq. (11.21), The first words should read "Let Psi transform". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 173: Just below eq. (11.5), "(i del_mu alpha)" should read "(i del_mu delta alpha)". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 175: In eq. (11.39), for clarity, the second "(F^{mu nu a} t^a_R)" should read "(F^{mu nu b} t^b_R)". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 175: In the first line below eq. (11.41), "fieldsPsi" should read "fields Psi". In the third line "ofPsi _i" should read "of Psi_i". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
• Chapter 12:
  • p. 188: On the left-hand side of eq. (12.5), "log Q" should read "d log Q". The same correction is needed in all three lines of eq. (12.8). (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
• Chapter 13:
  • p. 206: In the first line of eq. (13.22), the term "(t^b ijt^b kl)" should read "(t^b_{ij} t^b_{kl})". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 207: On the left-hand side of eq. (13.29), the argument in parentheses should read "(qg->qg)", as in eq. (13.31). (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
• Chapter 14:
  • p. 219: There is a problem with the typography in eq. (14.11). This equation should properly read: "Psi -> e^{ i vec alpha . vec sigma/2} Psi" and "Psi -> e^{ i vec alpha . (vec sigma/2) gamma^5} Psi". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 223: In eqs. (14.30), the first exponential should read should read "e^{-i \vec p . \vec x}", with p and x as 3-vectors. The superscript "05a" on j is correct.
  • p. 221: In line 4 of the first full paragraph, "LetPhi( x)" should read "Let Phi(x)". Also in the first line below eq. (14.20), "operatorPhihas" should read "operator Phi has". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 223: In eq. (14.30), the exponential should read "e^{-i vec p . vec x}". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 227: It is not obvious why I did not write (14.55) simply as (md-mu)/(md+mu) = (mK0^2 - mK+^2)/(mpi^2). However, this equation gives a significantly different answer, 0.2 instead of 0.3. The explanation is that electromagnetism also affects the mass difference between K+ and K0. These corrections are larger for the K+; electromagnetism gives the charged particle gets a larger mass than the neutral particle. This is why the pi+ is heavier than the pi0. It can be shown that the electromagnetic correction giving (mpi+^2 - mpi0^2) is equal to the electromagnetic correction to (mK+^2 - mK0^2). Then the formula (14.55) cancels this correction and thus gives a more accurate evaluation of the quark masses. (Thanks to Jaime Anguiano Olarra.)
  • p. 228: In the third line on the page, "the masses of the light quark masses" should read "the masses of the light quarks". (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
• Chapter 15:
  • p. 243: On the right-hand side of eq. (15.22), "p_mu" should read "p_q" and "p'_mu" should read "p'_q". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 240: In the first line of eq. (15.38), after "16GF^2", the factor of the muon mass should read "m_mu^4", not "m_mu^3". Also, the factor "(1-x_{nubar})^2" should be simply "(1-x_{nubar})". The second line of this equation is correct as written. (Thanks to Ruth Britto.)
  • p. 243: Eq. (15.50) has a LaTex misprint. I hope you can read that the ket is "|pi^2(p)>".
  • p. 45: In the second line of eq. (15.70), the argument "nubar_R d_L -> mu^+_R u_L" should read "nubar_R u_L -> mu^+_R d_L" (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
• Chapter 16:
  • p. 252: In the second line below eq. (16.7), the equation should read "delta gamma = eta/v". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 256: On the right-hand side of eq. (16.27), the first exponential should read "e^{i vec alpha . vec sigma/2}". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 257: In the next to last line of the top paragraph, "The ratio g'/g is a an" should read "The ratio g'/g is an". (Thanks to Ruth Britto.)
• Chapter 17:
  • p. 264: Just above eq. (17.2), "offthe" should read "off the". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 268: At the end of line 4 below eq. (17.17), "quantity" should read "quantify". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 269: In the second line below eq. (17.25), "p pbar" should read "pp". (Thanks to Jaime Anguiano Olarra.)
• Chapter 18:
  • p. 284: At the end of the first line on the page, "dcay" should read "decay". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 286: Two lines below eq. (18.20), "tnan" should read "than". (Thanks to Wim Cosyn.)
  • p. 291: In eq. (18.42), "|V_cb|^2" should read "|V_cb|^{-2}". (Thanks to Ruth Britto.)
• Chapter 19:
  • p. 305: In the 2nd line below eq. (19.57), "the decay the" should read: "include the decay of the" . (Thanks to Andrzej Czarnecki.)
  • p. 310: In Exercise 19.1, part (b), 2nd line, "direct decay" should read simply "decay". (Thanks to Andrzej Czarnecki.)
  • p. 310: In eqs. (19.69) and (19.70), in both arguments of M, "K" should read "K^0". The same change should be made in eq. (19.71).
  • p. 311: In eq. (19.72), in the 2nd line, "K^0" should be replaced by "Kbar^0". In the 3rd line "Kbar^0" should be replaced by "K^0". (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
• Chapter 20:
  • p. 314: In eq. (20.3), the prefactor should be multiplied by (4pi)^2, since we integrate over the angular variables. (Thanks to Ruth Britto.)
  • p. 317: Just below eq. (20.19), there is a small LaTeX error -- the space should appear before the Delta.
• Chapter 21:
  • p. 329: In eq. (21.9), the factor "64" in the denominator should be "64 pi". (Thanks to Ruth Britto.)
  • p. 330: 5 lines above eq. (21.14), "the next lightest Standard Model particle" should read "the next lighter Standard Model particle". (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
• Chapter 22:
• Backmatter:
  • Eq. (A.18) should read: " (sigma^i)^2 = 1, sigma^i sigma^j = i epsilon^{ijk} sigma^k for i not = j". (Thanks to Ruth Britto.)
  • p. 357: In eq. (A.21), the delta function should read "delta^(4)(k)". (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
  • p. 361: There are several errors in eq. (C.3). In line 2, on the left, "v_R(p)" should read "v_R^dagger(p). In line 2, on the right, "psi_L^dagger(x)" should read "psi_L(x)". In line 3, on the right, "u_R^daggerp)" should read "u_R^dagger(p)". In line 4, on the left, "psi_L(x)" should read "psi_L^dagger(x)" and "fbar_R p)" should read "fbar_R(p)". Also, in this line on the right, "psi_R^dagger(x)" should read "psi_R(x)". In each case, the equation on the right should be the complex conjugate of the equation on the left. (Thanks to Qin Qin.)
  • p. 363: In eq. (D.2), the first factor on the right-hand side should have the denominator "2E_A 2E_B |v_A-v_B|". (Thanks to Qin Qin).

  ---

  M. E. Peskin

  SLAC