Timeline for Which part of physical B model is not rigorous?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7, 2010 at 1:51 | comment | added | HYYY | By the way, what do we really mean by mathematical defintion of B model, and what is the relation to the definition by physicists?(I said no problem in feynman integral part) | |
| Mar 6, 2010 at 13:55 | answer | added | Eric Zaslow | timeline score: 3 | |
| Mar 6, 2010 at 13:37 | comment | added | HYYY | O,I mean topological B model, so, for example, why is it not rigorous constructed by physicist,the problem is in path integral(but it seems it is finite dimensional) or anything else?Thanks! | |
| Mar 6, 2010 at 4:53 | comment | added | Aaron Bergman | What do you mean by the physical B-model? There's the IIB string and the topological B-model, but I don't know of a physical B-model. | |
| Mar 6, 2010 at 3:55 | comment | added | HYYY | I see the articles constructing the B model mathematically,but I don't know why they do this,or do that ,because there is no relating to original physics. | |
| Mar 6, 2010 at 1:38 | history | edited | HYYY | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 27 characters in body
|
| Mar 6, 2010 at 0:10 | answer | added | Kevin H. Lin | timeline score: 1 | |
| Mar 5, 2010 at 23:47 | answer | added | Eric Zaslow | timeline score: 1 | |
| Mar 5, 2010 at 22:41 | history | asked | HYYY | CC BY-SA 2.5 |