Dimensional regularization is just high-level bullshit
-
-
Replying to @knighton_bob
well .. it’s actually rather well defined believe it or not .. cf Terrance Taos very long blogpost about it
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
-
Replying to @knighton_bob
〈 Berger | Dillon 〉 Retweeted 〈 Berger | Dillon 〉
〈 Berger | Dillon 〉 added,
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @InertialObservr
This is about regularizing divergent sums, which is certainly well-defined in a certain sense. It has not much to do with dimensional regularization, however (afaik).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @knighton_bob
dim reg is a subset .. he shows regulator independence
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @InertialObservr @knighton_bob
so the method of regulation is irrelevant because they’re all the same asymptotic expansion
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @InertialObservr
I think my point is that it’s weird to even call dim reg a “regulator” because the way it’s implemented is completely unrelated to the “add a smooth regulator to a sum/integral) method this type of math uses. Something about analytically continuing in the dimensionality of your..
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Yes but you can write it all in closed form in a big nasty function of zeta functions
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.