nateHI
- 145
- 4
https://www.ma.utexas.edu/users/dafr/OldTQFTLectures.pdf
I'm reading the paper linked above (page 10) and have a simple question about notation and another that's more of a sanity check. Given a space ##Y## and a spacetime ##X## the author talks about the associated Quantum Hilbert Spaces ##E(Y)## and ##E(\partial X)##.
The Simple Question: Elements of ##E(Y)## are just ##L^2## functions ##f:Y\to \mathbb{R}## right?
The Sanity Check: If ##X## is the spacetime and ##Y## the space then ##Y## is the boundary of ##X##. So why the different notations when talking about the Hilbert space ##E(Y)## itself and the other ##E(\partial X)## when talking about path integrals?
I'm reading the paper linked above (page 10) and have a simple question about notation and another that's more of a sanity check. Given a space ##Y## and a spacetime ##X## the author talks about the associated Quantum Hilbert Spaces ##E(Y)## and ##E(\partial X)##.
The Simple Question: Elements of ##E(Y)## are just ##L^2## functions ##f:Y\to \mathbb{R}## right?
The Sanity Check: If ##X## is the spacetime and ##Y## the space then ##Y## is the boundary of ##X##. So why the different notations when talking about the Hilbert space ##E(Y)## itself and the other ##E(\partial X)## when talking about path integrals?
Last edited: