Errors in Unit Q, 2/e

NOTE: In all that follows I will use <letter name> to represent a Greek-letter variable, ^ to indicate that the next quantity is superscripted, _ to indicate that the next quantity is subscripted, and boldface to indicate a vector quantity. I will also go against typographical convention and put punctuation outside of quotation marks to make whatever is enclosed in quotes exactly reflect what is (or should be) in the text. The date in paretheses specifies when the error was first posted.

  • first leaf, second line: the first value of h-bar should have units of joules times seconds. (5/31/03)
  • page 76, problem Q4R.2, first line: "Tomkins" should be spelled "Tompkins". (08/143/04)
  • page 84, last line: change "electron" to "quanton". (08/14/04)
  • page 85, Figure Q5.3: change "electron source" "quanton source". (08/14/04)
  • page 85, sixth line of first full paragraph: change "many electrons" to "many quantons". (08/14/04)
  • page 88, first paragraph, last line: extend italics to the end of the sentence. (08/14/03)
  • page 96, fourth line after equation Q5.17: change "figure Q5.6a" to "figure Q5.6b". (08/14/03)
  • page 107, second full paragraph, third line from the end: change "and a 0s everywhere" to "and 0s everywhere". (08/14/03)
  • page 109, example Q6.1, second line of "Solution": reference should be to figure Q6.6b, not Q6.1b. (08/14/04)
  • page 113, last paragraph: to references to figure Q6.9 should be changed to refer to figure Q6.10. (08/14/04)
  • page 117, problem Q6.10, second line: change a/x to x/a. (5/31/03)
  • page 145, figure Q8.8a: the downward force arrow should be distinctly smaller than the upward force arrow. (5/31/03)
  • page 151, third line: change "recognize that potential rises" to "recognize that the potential rises". (08/14/04)
  • page 172, problem Q9S.6: The question was supposed to contrast the actual neon atom with a hypothetical replacement atom for the neon atom where the transition of interest is to the new atom's ground state instead of to an excited energy level. Of course, one of the answers to the question as stated would be that the transition would not be visible, but this is not what I was interested in. I will have to reword the problem eventually to make the issue clearer. (5/31/03)
  • page 189, problem Q10S.4, third line: the given wavefunction should be +<psi>_E (x) = Ae^+/-bx, not -<psi>_E (x) = Ae^+/-bx / x. The most important issue is that given wavefunction should not be divided by x. (8/11/06)
  • page 192, equation Q11.2: delete "= 0" at the end of this equation.
  • page 206, problem Q11T.1, second line: change "equation where" to "equation for a given potential where". (5/31/03)
  • page 208, problem Q11S.4: the problem should specify that the well widths should remain constant at 0.5 nm as the center-to-center separation changes. (5/31/03)
  • page 225, problem Q12T.8: change "Bequerel" to Becquerel". (08/14/04)
  • page 230, item numbered "1": move "(unlike the electromagnetic interaction)" to just before the second comma. (08/14/04)
  • page 233, third line from bottom: lower prefix subscript on Sc should be 21, not 22. (08/14/04)
  • page 236, equations Q13S.10 and Q13S.11: A should be raised to the negative 1/3 power, not positive. (06/02/03)
  • page 243, fourth line of answer to exercise Q13X.5: "their" should be "there". (08/14/04)
  • page 246, near the bottom: the text should say (as it did in the first edition) that EC decays are quite improbable compared to beta-minus decays when both are possible, because it requires the nucleus to capture a wandering electron, a low-probability process. One needs to know this to correctly answer some of the problems. (08/14/04)
  • page 250, equation Q14.2: change the minus sign to a plus sign. (5/31/03)
  • page 259, third line of example Q14.4: change "For" to "(For". (08/14/03)
  • page 261, second line above "Synthetic": change "figure Q14.3" to "figure Q14.4".
  • page 272, equation Q15.7: the result should be 74 GJ, not 7.4 GJ. The line following should read "1.6 million times" instead of "150,000 times". (08/14/04)

05/31/03 and 06/02/03: Thanks to David Tanenbaum and Greg Kilcup for finding some of the errors posted on these dates.

08/14/04: Thanks to Vic DeCarlo and Jonas Murieka for finding most of the errors posted on this date.

Go back to the index or back to the top.