Timeline for 2-pt String Sphere Amplitudes
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 28, 2019 at 23:12 | vote | accept | Wakabaloola | ||
| Feb 6, 2018 at 20:14 | answer | added | Wakabaloola | timeline score: 6 | |
| Feb 6, 2018 at 18:15 | history | edited | Wakabaloola | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
minor clarification added to regularisation procedure
|
| Feb 4, 2018 at 17:17 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPhysics/status/960200682551808000 | ||
| Feb 4, 2018 at 13:58 | history | edited | Wakabaloola | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 10 characters in body
|
| Feb 3, 2018 at 21:18 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ |
edited tags
|
|
| Feb 3, 2018 at 21:13 | history | edited | Wakabaloola | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 45 characters in body
|
| Feb 3, 2018 at 21:00 | history | edited | Wakabaloola | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 45 characters in body
|
| Feb 3, 2018 at 20:53 | history | edited | Wakabaloola | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
I have added a `some details' section which provides some technical details of the calculation leading to the stated result.
|
| Feb 3, 2018 at 13:14 | comment | added | Wakabaloola | .. So I believe there is a mistake in the above calculation and the only subtle part is calculating the volume of CKG (because there are multiple regions where the integrand diverges, reminiscent of overlapping divergences in higher loop Feynman diagrams), so the mistake must be there but I cannot find it .. | |
| Feb 3, 2018 at 13:04 | comment | added | Wakabaloola | @Rexcirus: the problem is independent of the delta function; such a non-vanishing contribution would give wrong S-matrix elements. In particular, one might imagine that this calculation is really just a contribution to the trivial part of the S matrix, i.e. the $\mathbb{1}$ in $S=\mathbb{1}+iT$, but this cannot be true because of two reasons: $I_2$ is imaginary and secondly contains a delta function in all $D$ spacetime dimensions rather than $D-1$ as one would expect from the $\mathbb{1}$ in standard QFT. So I | |
| Feb 3, 2018 at 8:28 | comment | added | Rexcirus | Perhaps the textbooks that you mention give for granted that $k \neq k'$? | |
| Feb 2, 2018 at 11:39 | history | edited | Wakabaloola | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 118 characters in body
|
| Feb 2, 2018 at 11:34 | history | edited | Wakabaloola | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 118 characters in body
|
| Feb 2, 2018 at 11:24 | history | edited | Wakabaloola | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 19 characters in body
|
| Feb 2, 2018 at 11:14 | history | asked | Wakabaloola | CC BY-SA 3.0 |