If you find an error in the text I would appreciate a short email to errors@jakobschwichtenberg.com. All known errors are listed here. The errata list in the first edition can be found here.

### Physics and Math Errata

- p.42 eq 3.60 needs det(O) (Thanks to Konstantinos Tsagaris)
- p.55 equ 3.93 wrong power on J_3 (Thanks to Konstantinos Tsagaris)
- On page 60 in equation 3.120 and the preceding line, the right hand side should have $m-1$, not $m+1$ in the ket. (Thanks to Taylor Esch and Fabian Waetermans.)
- p.149 at the end of the calculation for 7.65 there is a g/i missing when you bring back the W (Thanks to Konstantinos Tsagaris)
- also from equ 7.62 up to 7.66 there are numerous index mistakes on the W_\mu\nu (Thanks to Konstantinos Tsagaris)
- page 189 between 8.34 and 8.35 it is $phi_2 +phi_3$ and not $phi_1 + phi_3$. (Thanks to Fabian Waetermans.)
- page 193 under formule 8.49, it should be $b=1$ and $a=0$. The same typo appears at the beginning of page 195. (Thanks to Fabian Waetermans.)
- page 204 where it is written dividing by $m$ it should be $u$ and not $c$ (Thanks to Fabian Waetermans.)

### Grammar, Spelling and Formatting Errors

- p.11 sidenote1 “depends* on the frame”
- p.16 middle of the page “it follows… ds^2 [space] that”
- p.43 in anticommutativity the universal quantifier is too far on the left
- p.52 footnote81: corresponds*
- also in the middle of the page I’m not sure Casimir “elements” operators is what you meant to write
- p.56 before equ 3.99 “to learn something about what finite-dimensional, irreducible representations of SU(2) are possible [of]”
- p.74 7 lines under equ 3.187 there need to be 2 commas: “…is, after a rotation by 2pi, not the same”
- p.76 equ 3.202 at the second line there is a reduntant parenthesis
- p.79 at the end of the second paragraph “when we [will] need invariant”
- also in the 156 sidenote at the end it doesn’t make sense: “the spinor equation here can be read as component equation that do not need it”
- p.91 at the top “representations of [the] double cover”
- p.93 first paragraph “n-tupel” & end of first paragraph “ins”
- p.102 after equ 4.13 “the equation[s] of motion stay”
- p.112 second paragraph “will prove to be INvaluable” i think you mean to say valuable
- p.133 chap 7.1 “internal symmetrie[s]”
- p.137 before equ 7.14 I think the expression you were looking for is “two pieces of the same puzzle”
- p.139 after equ 7.22 “the notion [of] minimal coupling”
- p.150 equ 7.66 at the last line LateX has messed up your parenthesis size and its a bit confusing to the eye
- p.152 equ 7.78 W transforms to W’ (the prime is missing)
- p.151 equ. 7.69 in the interaction term the index on B is wrong
- p.155 equ 7.95 in the middle line there is a redundant parenthesis
- p.180 5th line from the top: commuting* (I have mostly heard people say “they commute” rather than “they commutate”)
- p.189 last sentence before 8.5.3 “which [is] extremely helpful”
- p.192 end of first paragraph for Spin: “which of course always yields 0 when [we operate] with it on a state”
- p.213 end of equ 9.15 there is a wrong parenthesis size

(All reported by Konstantinos Tsagaris)