[ 7 posts ] 
 Typos in the 2007 Vintage Paperback edition 
Author Message

Joined: 19 Mar 2008, 13:44
Posts: 9
Location: Beirut, Lebanon
Post Typos in the 2007 Vintage Paperback edition
The following typos were found in the 2007 paperback:

Page 138-Line 20 : "unambiguously"
Page 222- Fig.12.5 Line 4 : "Hausdorff"
Page 234- Mobius: the "o" needs an "umlaut"
Page 281- Parag.13.9-Line 16:the[2,0] tensor should be a [0,2] tensor.
Page 360- Line 20: The famous error noted by fallingup as "error in section 16.2"
Page 360 -Line 22 : the indices of the a's should be lower indices.
Page 361- Fig. 16.2 :"Finite-Geometry versions of the theorems of Fig 15.14", instead of 5.14.
Page 1090- "Friedmann- Lamaitre-Robertson-Walker"should be Lemaitre(of course!).
Same page- "Gross, David 679" is misplaced and should be deleted.


03 Apr 2008, 06:06

Joined: 16 Jun 2008, 03:19
Posts: 1
Location: Denmark
Post Re: Typos in the 2007 Vintage Paperback edition
Page 1087: "Bohr, Neils" should be "Bohr, Niels".


16 Jun 2008, 03:21

Joined: 12 Jul 2008, 00:27
Posts: 1
Post Re: Typos in the 2007 Vintage Paperback edition
Page 97
z = log r + i... should be: log z = log r + i...


12 Jul 2008, 00:33
Supporter
Supporter

Joined: 07 Jun 2008, 08:21
Posts: 235
Post Re: Typos in the 2007 Vintage Paperback edition
azz0 wrote:
Page 97
z = log r + i... should be: log z = log r + i...


I don't agree with you if you are talking about the page where the full line is

z=\log r+i\theta,

The only way to make this clearer, since Penrose has written w=e^z in the previous paragraph, is to write

z=\log w=\log r+i\theta

In my 2005 edition this is on page 94 section 5.3


12 Jul 2008, 08:11

Joined: 03 Jan 2009, 09:35
Posts: 2
Post Re: Typos in the 2007 Vintage Paperback edition
Page 96, i is missing on both sides of the equation e^(a+b)=(e^a)(e^b)


04 Jan 2009, 01:15
Supporter
Supporter

Joined: 07 Jun 2008, 08:21
Posts: 235
Post Re: Typos in the 2007 Vintage Paperback edition
Are you presenting us with a New Year joke?
If not can you explain this in more detail please? It doesn't make sense to me.
zorba wrote:
Page 96, i is missing on both sides of the equation e^(a+b)=(e^a)(e^b)

So what do you think the equation should be when it's corrected?


04 Jan 2009, 09:03

Joined: 03 Jan 2009, 09:35
Posts: 2
Post Re: Typos in the 2007 Vintage Paperback edition
vasco wrote:
Are you presenting us with a New Year joke?
If not can you explain this in more detail please? It doesn't make sense to me.
zorba wrote:
Page 96, i is missing on both sides of the equation e^(a+b)=(e^a)(e^b)

So what do you think the equation should be when it's corrected?


Sorry, I did not mean that the equation e^(a+b)=(e^a)(e^b) is wrong per se. What I meant is that if one is going to show those expressions on page 96 using Euler formula then one will include the i in them.
e^i(a+b)=(e^ia)(e^ib)
cos(a+b)+isin(a+b)=(cosa+isina)(cosb+isinb)
The right side of the above equation becomes
cosacosb-sinasinb+i[sinacosb+cosasinb]
Thus
cos(a+b)=cosacosb-sinasinb
sin(a+b)=sinacosb+cosasinb


28 Jun 2009, 22:37
   [ 7 posts ] 


cron