Timeline for Why are infinite order Lagrangians called 'non-local'?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 12, 2013 at 10:18 | comment | added | Arnold Neumaier | @ramanujan_dirac: Non-local is just defined this way. There is no other way to tell local from nonlocal. | |
| Dec 21, 2012 at 13:33 | comment | added | user7757 | @Arnold: I am fine with the fact that any non-local interacn can be expressed as a power series involving arbitrarily many derivatives, but how can you say that any infinite series of higher order derivatives, you give you such an interaction? How can we generally assume, any infinite power series of higher order derivatives would give a non-local interaction? | |
| S May 14, 2012 at 1:52 | history | suggested | Emilio Pisanty | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
corrected equation
|
| May 14, 2012 at 1:49 | comment | added | Ron Maimon | This is the only correct answer. Higher order theories are not nonlocal, I don't know anyone who calls them nonlocal--- they give rise to local equations of motion (of high order), and local simulation methods. | |
| May 14, 2012 at 0:14 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S May 14, 2012 at 1:52 | |||||
| May 13, 2012 at 14:31 | history | answered | Arnold Neumaier | CC BY-SA 3.0 |