New answers tagged

0

From a physicists point of view, I would start with the following notes, which are Chapter 9 in John Preskill's Quantum Computing lecture notes: http://www.theory.caltech.edu/~preskill/ph219/topological.pdf, as well as the references within. I would also mention Kitaev's paper https://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0506438 as a specially influential reference. ...


0

I found this paper in Numdam's (a mathematical journal compilation) archive, which encompasses all that you talked about and I found it clear, with some references to Witten as well. This paper goes much further in detail, but I did not read all of it. And this might help if you aren't bothered by learning by forum posts?


1

\begin{equation} \begin{split} \frac{d(g_b\mu^{\epsilon})}{d\log\mu^2}&=\frac{\mu}{2}\frac{d(g_b\mu^{\epsilon})}{d\mu}\\ &=\frac{\mu}{2}\left[\mu^{\epsilon}\frac{dg_b}{d\mu}+g_b\frac{d\mu^{\epsilon}}{d\mu}\right] \end{split} \end{equation} By definition, the bare coupling does not depend on the renormalization scale $\mu$. Hence \begin{equation} \...


0

(Answering rather than commenting for lack of rep). My focus is in programming however perhaps the following would help (From what I can understand due to different terminology): Instead of reducing the components, how about factoring them into higher dimensions, I imagine the irregularities would become more apparent given the supposed symmetrical outcome, ...


0

this question is 2 years old, but I thought it's never too late. I'm not sure about the definite answer, but here are my thoughts. Take the SO(6) algebra viewpoint. The $\mathbf{6}$ is the fundamental (vector) representation, and the $\mathbf{4}$ is the spinor representation. So we are looking for symbols $\Sigma_{AB}^I$ that combine two spinors into a ...



Top 50 recent answers are included