Different groups publish their results in different formats, have you checked out their respective websites?
There is a universal interface called lhapdf https://lhapdf.hepforge.org/ where you will probably find any today relevant (proton) pdf set. I don't think they have a native Mathematica...
Are you just asking how to plot several graphs in the same plot in mathematica? In that case I guess have a look here https://reference.wolfram.com/language/ref/Plot.html, the second syntax is what you want. Maybe I am not understanding what the question is?
So, how does that change things? I was replying to the post above mine (by someone else than the original OP, I assume someone being asked this HW question now) from this morning.
Traditionally there are no full solutions shared here without showing prior work, in particular not in the homework part of the forum (though I think in this case most of the solution is above). If you are currently working on this as part of your now studies, maybe you want to share where you...
I am not saying you necessarily should, but have you considered staying in Munich? They have reasonably strong research on (some aspects of) theoretical particle physics. Maybe if you spell out what you don't like about that it's easier to come up with alternatives.
You wrote (my emphasis):
So I looked up what a popular distance program charges. My conclusion was that the equivalent amount will probably not buy you a lot of individual face-to-face time. But I asked what your idea of a price was, so please correct me if you had other numbers in mind.
A lot of authors of textbooks have websites where they collect corrections that have been found over time. Most textbooks owned by physicist (i.e. not libraries) had corrections written into them with pencil. I think you are mistaken that most people (who have careers in physics) don't notice...
They seem to have a good website (no worries I googled for you https://www.hep.phy.cam.ac.uk/) detailing what the different groups are doing. Looks like ATLAS and LHCb rather than CMS if that is a factor for you, but they mention detector work. It might be worth contacting some of the people...
From what you write it seems to me as follows: You made some contribution to the research of the group, that might eventually be included in a paper. I don't think I have enough information to comment on whether you should be in the author list of that, but it is anyway not judged to be enough...
This sounds like you had definite plans on publishing? If that is accurate (go back to your emails, what exactly did you exchange) I don't see what would be wrong about asking what happened to those plans. Did the professor agree/acknowledge that the project would be put on hold for that long...
Is there really a formal requirement that the width not be too large? I.e. is something different in the maths in that case? Are there examples of poles in propagators that are not considered resonances because their imaginary part is too large?
Ah, no for the left hand side there is not change of variables, just a renaming. You can write equation (5.1.4) as
## \Psi^+_l(x) = \sum_{\sigma,n} \int d^3(\Lambda p) u_l(x;\mathbb{p}_\Lambda,\sigma,n)a(\mathbb{p}_\Lambda,\sigma,n) ##
by just renaming the integration variable. Note also the...
As far as I can tell this extra factor is correct and included in Weinberg‘s derivation (in my edition it is mentioned at the top of p. 194, and is then included in the unnumbered equations before (5.1.13)). Do you agree with those? You have an extra
##\sqrt{(\Lambda p)^0/p^0}##
from (5.1.11)...