Here is a list of typos and corrections that I know about.

Chapter 2

  • Page 34: Four lines below Section 2.3.2: "What gravitational potential do you feel?" The word "do" was missing.
  • Page 50: In (2.125), the denominator in the first equation has a (\omega_0^2-\Omega)^2. That \Omega should be \Omega^2.
  • Page 55: In the first line of the second paragraph of Section 2.5.4. "electron" should be "electrons". Later, "Drude mode" → "Drude model".

Chapter 3

  • Page 70: Last paragraph, first line "make from there" → "make from these".

Chapter 5

  • Page 96: Below (5.4), m\ddot{R}=0 should really be just \ddot{R}=0, although given that m is not zero, it doesn’t make much difference!
  • Page 112: In the "Repulsive Force" subsection, the inequality should be 3\pi/2 < \theta < 2\pi, not < \pi as written.
  • Page 115: In (5.76), the -r term mysteriously disappears in the middle equation before reappearing in the final equation.
  • Page 117: In the first line of (5.81), the first term on the RHS should have a 1/c^2 instead of 1/c.
  • Page 117: The perturbation expansion of the solution is a little fiddly because there’s an additional constant 3ku_0^2/c^2 which is implicitly small. It’s better to remove the \epsilons in the expansion above (5.80) and instead write u(r) = u_0 + u_1(r) under the assumption u_1(r) \ll u_0. Then expand to leading order in u_1, instead of \epsilon.
  • Page 118: The final term in (5.82) should have a k^3 instead of k^2.
  • Page 122: The third line, TG = F'G should be TG = F'T.

Chapter 6

  • Page 144: Second paragraph of Section 6.3.2, "circular orbit with radius r" should be "circular orbit with constant separation r".
  • Page 145: Just above (6.36), M_1 >> M_2 should be M_2 >> M_1.

Chapter 7

  • Page 182: In the second line of (7.92), the t' should just be t.
  • Page 198: In the paragraph between (7.150) and (7.151), the \dot{\phi} should be \dot{\theta}.
  • Page 205: In (1.174), all equations should have an m on the LHS.
  • Page 208: Above (7.180), "The the distance" should be "Then the distance".
  • Page 209: In (7.185), on the LHS the second term should be derivative with respect to q^k, not k.

Chapter 8

  • Page 213: (8.18) should have a minus sign on the RHS.
  • Page 219: In (8.35), the derivatives of the V on the RHS should have a 1/m_3 factor. In (8.38), each RHS should also have a 1/m_3 factor.
  • Page 220: In (8.41) there’s an errant ( in the denominator of the first term on the RHS.
  • Page 222: Four lines from the bottom, e^{-2\pi i qan} should be just e^{iqan}.
  • Page 223: Below (8.61), it should say \omega^2 \approx 4k/m, not 2k/m.

Chapter 9

  • Page 232: In the expression of (9.61), the derivative dR_{ij}/dt is missing the d in the numerator.
  • Page 233: I stupidly got spherical polar coordinates wrong! The first un-numbered equation at the top of the page should read x = (r\sin\theta \cos\phi, r\sin\theta \sin\phi, r\cos\theta) and the second un-numbered equation should read \dot{x} = (-r\sin\theta \sin\phi, r\sin\theta \cos\phi, 0) \dot{\phi}.
  • Page 237: Above (9.30), it says \hat{n} . \hat{n} = -1 and it should be +, obv!
  • Page 238: In (9.33), the I should be script I.
  • Page 244: In the second sentence of Section 9.3.2, "consisted" → "considered".
  • Page 247: In the third sentence of Section 9.4.1, "angular momentum \omega" → "angular velocity \omega".

Chapter 10

  • Page 307: In (10.112), the two q^i should be Q^i.
  • Page 309: In (10.124), the i and j indices should be swapped on the right-hand side. It should read dF^i/dq^j = - dE_j/dp_i. The text should also be more explicit that (10.124) is necessary but not sufficient: the other requirements are dF^i/dp_j = dF^j/dp_i and dE_i/dq^j = dE_j/dq^i, both of which are satisfied once you use (10.125).
  • Page 323: Below (10.179), it states \theta_\phi = \phi. This is just wrong! \theta_\phi is, like \theta_r, some complicated function.

Chapter 11

  • Page 355: 4th line from the top: "show" → "shown".
  • Page 362: Below (11.31), in the formula l > L/\gamma(1+v), the (1+v) should be (1+v/c).
  • Page 383: It’s better to add an integration constant + x_0 to (11.110) to make it consistent with the subsequent figures where the trajectory is shown.

My thanks to Mark Weitzman, Mike Worboys, Hugo Lange, Kaushik Basu, Steve Martin, and Zhiyu Wang for catching some of these typos.