Timeline for Gaussian path integral is equivalent to saddle-point?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 26, 2019 at 17:12 | answer | added | Qmechanic♦ | timeline score: 3 | |
| Jun 26, 2019 at 3:28 | vote | accept | Dwagg | ||
| Jun 26, 2019 at 3:20 | comment | added | CR Drost | The reference to saddle-points reminds me in part of the method of steepest descent if that helps? | |
| Jun 26, 2019 at 3:07 | answer | added | MannyC | timeline score: 5 | |
| Jun 26, 2019 at 2:54 | comment | added | Jahan Claes | I'm not sure that this could be true. If a field appears in the action as a Gaussian like $\phi_n(\nabla^2+r(\phi_1,...,\phi_{n-1}))\phi_n$, then its E-L equation is just $(\nabla^2+r(\phi_1,...,\phi_{n-1}))\phi_n=0$, and so plugging in a solution for $\phi_n$ just causes all terms involving $\phi_n$ to disappear from the action. On the other hand, doing the Gaussian integral for $\phi_n$ gives you a factor of something like $\det(\nabla^2+r)^{-1}$, which is not the same as just disappearing entirely. | |
| Jun 26, 2019 at 2:36 | history | asked | Dwagg | CC BY-SA 4.0 |