0

i am trying to reproduce these contractions of peskin.But none of my code works. please help me out here.thank you.

The contractions i want to reproduce

 \documentclass{beamer}
 \usepackage{amssymb}
 \usepackage{amsmath}
 \usepackage{simpler-wick}
 \begin{document}
 $
  \wick{    
\langle \c1 {p'},\c2{k'}|(\c2{\Bar{\psi}}\c3\psi)_x(\c1{\Bar{\psi}}\c4\psi)_y|\c4p,\c3k \rangle
        }
 $

 $ \wick[offset=2em]{
 \langle 0|\c1 a_{k'}\c2 a_{p'}\c1 \Bar{\psi}_x \c3 \psi_x \c2 \Bar{\psi}_y \c4\psi_y \c4 a_p^{\dagger}\c3 a_k^{\dagger}|0 \rangle            }   
 $

 $
\wick[offset=2em]{

   \langle \c1 {p'}, \c2 {k'}|(\c1 {\Bar{\psi}}\c4  \psi)_x(\c2 {\Bar{\psi}}\c3 \psi)_y|\c3 p,\c4 k \rangle
                  }
 $

 $
 \wick[offset=2em]{
  \langle 0|\c1 a_{k'}\c2 a_{p'}\c2 \Bar{\psi}_x \c3 \psi_x \c1 \Bar{\psi}_y \c4\psi_y \c4 a_p^{\dagger}\c3 a_k^{\dagger}|0 \rangle
                   }
 $
 \end{document}

all these gives no result except this. i dont understand why.i tried to put a curly braces after each \c1 but no result been produced..:( enter image description here

1

I made your code run through, mainly by adding curly brackets.

\documentclass{beamer}
 \usepackage{amssymb}
 \usepackage{amsmath}
 \usepackage{simpler-wick}
 \begin{document}
 $
  \wick{    
\langle \c1{p'},\c2{k'}|(\c2{\Bar{\psi}}\c3\psi)_x(\c1{\Bar{\psi}}\c4\psi)_y|\c4p,\c3k \rangle
        }
 $

 $ \wick[offset=2em]{
 \langle 0|\c1{a}_{k'}\c2{a}_{p'}\c1{\Bar{\psi}_x} \c3{\psi_x} 
 \c2{\Bar{\psi}_y}\c4{\psi_y} \c4{a_p^{\dagger}}\c3{a_k^{\dagger}}|0 \rangle            
 }  
 $

 $
\wick[offset=2em]{
   \langle \c1{p'}, \c2{k'}|(\c1{\Bar{\psi}}\c4{\psi})_x(\c2{\Bar{\psi}}
   \c3{\psi})_y|\c3{p},\c4{k}\rangle
                  }
 $

 $
 \wick[offset=2em]{
  \langle 0|\c1{a}_{k'}\c2{a}_{p'}\c2{\Bar{\psi}_x} \c3{\psi_x} 
  \c1{\Bar{\psi}_y} \c4{\psi_y} \c4{a_p^{\dagger}}\c3{a_k^{\dagger}}|0 \rangle
                   }
 $
 \end{document}

enter image description here

Do you really want to use these huge offsets?

  • well.thank you sir.is there a better way? how would you prefer to do this? – jowadul kader Mar 9 '18 at 14:08
  • anyway it will work fine.but if you have some ingenious way will be happy to see that.thank you a lot. – jowadul kader Mar 9 '18 at 14:11
  • @jowadulkader I would mainly reduce the huge offsets. – marmot Mar 9 '18 at 14:13
  • yes its clumsy.very clumsy – jowadul kader Mar 9 '18 at 15:48

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.