- The problem with rigour is as perhaps user "eljose" has pointed before in his post :redface: is that you can put 'obstacles' to science, the same happened to infinitesimals dx , the Dirac delta function \delta (x) or "Feynmann (??) Path integrals" in QM or QFT (Field theory) to quantizy...
think "Alkatran" has avoided an important feature..we can't alwys take the sum of an integral equal to the integral of the sums..it's strange but true, the same happens with Borel resummation...if series is convergent you can take term-by-term Laplace transform, else (if divergent) you can't do...
I had a curious idea..let be a function f(x) with a singularity at x=1 then we define the function:
f(x)=f*(x)+\delta(x-1) and by definition f*(1)=0
f(x)=f*(x) for all x except x=1
as you can see both function diverge at x=1 however using this definiton...
The question is..let be the next integral:
\int_{V}d\mu f(X) V is a 3-D volume and X=(x,y,z) of course we have the problem in defining the meassure \mu but i think Daniell integral can avoid this problem but how??...
The Question Hurkyl..from the Physical point of view is that Physicist always need to look at the "Dynamic" of everything (space-time, particles, and so on) we always look in quantization expressions of the form:
i\hbar \frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial t}=H\Phi
OK,OK Hurkyl..but if we make a "Wick Rotation" (from real to complex plane) the Lorentz metric becomes just g_{ab}x^{a}x^{b} where all the diagonal components are just 1 and the rest 0 (Euclidean 4metric) in fact:
- To describe the dynamic of a particle in one dimension we define two...
A good intro for undergraduates can be found at ..
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/twf_ascii/week126
Based on an Euler converntion about divergent series..
resumming let be the divergent series..
1+2^{s}+3^{s}+...... \rightarrow \zeta (-s) (1)
of course if s<0 then the series...
"Hidden variable" in SR and GR Relativity??..
My question is, since we live in a 3-D world, what would happen for an "alien" living on a 4-D world??..if we suppose that space-time has only 4 dimension, and that after a Wick rotation then X_{0} =it then what we think is just a time component...
If the author had the article rejected without giving any "objective" reason, flaw in the argument, math error.. this is just censorship :frown: not peer- review just as if you reject or jail a man for being black is just racism not justice, in general they only prefer a good-looking paper that...
Solving this PDE :(
Hello i have a question about this..let be a function F(x(t),y(t),z(t),t) then if we use the "total derivative" respect to t and partial derivatives..could we find an F so it satisfies:
\frac{d (\frac{\partial F}{\partial x})}{dt}+\lambda F + (\frac{\partial...
- the question is.. there any "flaw" or error, in the argument??..
- Although you have mentioned the "peer-review" journal this does not proof its correctness,.. just remember the "hoaxes" by Peter Lynds (the boy who solved nothing and that is even supposed NOT to exist) or the "Bible Codes"...
let be A and B 2 operator so their commutator is:
[A,B]=1
then my question is if A and B are dependant of x,y,z,t then what would be the value of commutator:
[\partial_{c} A , \partial_{b} B]=?
where c and b can be x,y,z or t..thanks...:redface: :redface: