| Thread Closed |
Green Function approach is more physical? |
Share Thread | Thread Tools |
| Jun29-08, 09:40 PM | #1 |
|
|
Green Function approach is more physical?
Hey folks,
I'm not really sure which forum to put this question in but I figured this was probably the best as it deals with issues of regularization. I'm reading Miltons 'The Casimir Effect'. In chapter one he derives the Casimir energy for a massless scalar field by employing dimensional regularization. He then goes on in the next section to derive the same result using a Green function approach which he claims is "...a physical and rigorous approach". From this sentence it appears that he favors the Green function approach over Dim reg. Is this a general 'feeling' in the physics community? That Green functions are somehow superior to Dim Reg? Also, why should this be 'physical'? I hope this question makes sense. Rich |
| Jun30-08, 03:04 AM | #2 |
|
|
I do have the feeling that Greens functions are more physical than dimensional regularization. That is, I can very well imagine the physical meaning of a propagator, but I don't really have intuition for [itex]4 + \epsilon[/itex] dimensions with [itex]\epsilon \in \mathbb{C}[/itex].
I can't remember seeing Greens functions being used for regularization though. |
| Thread Closed |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads for: Green Function approach is more physical?
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | Replies | ||
| Another Green function question. | Calculus & Beyond Homework | 1 | ||
| Green function | Differential Equations | 5 | ||
| green function | Calculus & Beyond Homework | 2 | ||
| Green function | Calculus & Beyond Homework | 8 | ||
| Physical Chemistry: a Molecular Approach, McQuarrie | Science Textbook Discussion | 3 | ||