One statement I've heard many times is that QFT is "defined" by the lattice, or that the "only" definition of QFT is on the lattice (when such definition exists, e.g in pure Yang-Mills theory). I've heard that from many people I respect, but I have my doubts. Specifically - the lattice is an algorithmic definition of those quantities that can be calculated in Euclidean spacetime. As I said in my answer to this question, this is a proper subset of all physical quantities you may be interested in calculating in general, and many physical situations do not have Euclidean formulation. Is there some response to this objection I am missing, or am I being naive somehow?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
It is always told as a fact without explaining the reason. Why do two objects get charged by rubbing? Why one object get negative charge and...
-
cosmology - The difference between comoving and proper distances in defining the observable universe"The radius of the observable universe is estimated to be about 46.5 Gly." If I understand correctly, it means the most distant ob...
-
Are C1, C2 and C3 connected in parallel, or C2, C3 in parallel and C1 in series with C23? Btw it appeared as a question in the basic physics...
No comments:
Post a Comment