Timeline for Is the value of the action important?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 10, 2022 at 8:15 | vote | accept | Mauro Giliberti | ||
| Jul 9, 2022 at 16:59 | history | edited | Mauro Giliberti | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 22 characters in body
|
| Jul 9, 2022 at 2:50 | answer | added | Cleonis | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jul 9, 2022 at 2:42 | answer | added | tparker | timeline score: 3 | |
| Jul 8, 2022 at 22:11 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Jul 8, 2022 at 16:21 | comment | added | Mauro Giliberti | For those interested, a discussion following this question is being carried out in chat: chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/137623/… | |
| Jul 8, 2022 at 15:42 | vote | accept | Mauro Giliberti | ||
| Jul 8, 2022 at 23:55 | |||||
| Jul 8, 2022 at 15:27 | comment | added | Mauro Giliberti | @mmesser314 this makes a lot of sense to me. Then why is the value of the action used in equations like the ones from the linked paper? If I used the action "with an added 5", the nucleation rate would be different, even if the stationary path remains the same. Why should I add 0 instead of adding 5? | |
| Jul 8, 2022 at 15:24 | history | edited | Mauro Giliberti | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 539 characters in body
|
| Jul 8, 2022 at 15:21 | answer | added | Qmechanic♦ | timeline score: 5 | |
| Jul 8, 2022 at 15:08 | comment | added | mmesser314 | I didn't mean anything mysterious. Take an action. Find the stationary path. Add 5 to the action. You get the same stationary path. The minimum value has changed, but the new minimum still occurs in the same place. | |
| Jul 8, 2022 at 15:04 | comment | added | Mauro Giliberti | @mmesser314 if that is the case, then there's no confusion at all: I'm aware that the stationary math occurs where the action is minimized - I'm just not sure of the "whatever that turns out to be", hence the question. Could you explain why the specific value doesn't matter? | |
| Jul 8, 2022 at 15:01 | comment | added | Mauro Giliberti | @JoshuaLin References would be highly appreciated, thanks. So you're saying that the value of the action is only important in the Euclidean picture? If so, how could a Wick-rotation change so much about the information that one can "grab" from a functional? | |
| Jul 8, 2022 at 15:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPhysics/status/1545422460597805061 | ||
| Jul 8, 2022 at 14:58 | comment | added | mmesser314 | Perhaps the confusion is that the stationary path occurs where the action takes its minimum value. So it matters that the value be at its minimum, whatever that turns out to be. | |
| Jul 8, 2022 at 14:58 | comment | added | QCD_IS_GOOD | In the Euclidean picture it's clear that the value of the action is how much 'weight' a given field configuration has. This for example allows you to estimate the sizes of instanton effects from the value of the action (or at the very least, how such effects scale when you change parameters); I'm pretty sure about this but let me dig up some references | |
| Jul 8, 2022 at 14:50 | answer | added | Cort Ammon | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jul 8, 2022 at 14:29 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 22 characters in body; edited tags
|
| Jul 8, 2022 at 14:07 | history | asked | Mauro Giliberti | CC BY-SA 4.0 |