Skip to main content
19 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jul 1, 2016 at 20:19 answer added Willie Wong timeline score: 5
Jul 1, 2016 at 19:34 history reopened Charles Rezk
asv
Willie Wong
Andrés E. Caicedo
Carlo Beenakker
Jul 1, 2016 at 18:18 comment added asv @WillieWong: Done.
Jul 1, 2016 at 18:17 history edited asv CC BY-SA 3.0
added 41 characters in body
Jul 1, 2016 at 13:32 comment added Willie Wong @sva: please edit that in to the question statement proper. Your question can be concisely formulated as "Under what decay assumptions are solutions to $(\Box +m^2) u = 0$ necessarily trivial?" with the clarification that decay means "decay toward space/time infinity". // That question is partially answerable and is topic of current research. I've cast a vote to re-open and will provide an answer after the question is re-opened.
Jul 1, 2016 at 4:54 comment added asv @WillieWong: The domain is the whole space-time. By the boundary conditions I mean any extra assumptions on the decay of a function.
Jun 30, 2016 at 20:28 comment added Willie Wong Boundary conditions... where? Can you specify the (space-time) domain and boundary that you are interested in?
Jun 25, 2016 at 13:28 review Reopen votes
Jun 26, 2016 at 9:39
Jun 25, 2016 at 13:11 history edited asv CC BY-SA 3.0
added 228 characters in body
Jun 24, 2016 at 18:40 history closed Michael Renardy
Willie Wong
Igor Khavkine
Stefan Waldmann
Wolfgang
Needs details or clarity
Jun 24, 2016 at 18:35 comment added asv @IgorKhavkine: I have updated the post and added yet another example of a situation of interest which is more elementary and mathematically rigorous.
Jun 24, 2016 at 18:34 history edited asv CC BY-SA 3.0
added 694 characters in body
Jun 24, 2016 at 10:29 review Close votes
Jun 24, 2016 at 18:40
Jun 24, 2016 at 9:57 comment added Igor Khavkine Unfortunately, since you have not actually formulated a concrete mathematical question, your post is not really appropriate for MO. From the context, I can tell that a better forum for your question would be physics.SE. But, just to guide your thinking: the heuristic that you mentioned comes from thinking of a mechanical system with generalized position $q(t)$ on an interval $[t_0,t_1]$, where fixing the values of $q(t_i)$ usually uniquely fixes $q(t)$ (which could be $q(t)=0$).
Jun 24, 2016 at 9:46 comment added asv @IgorKhavkine: As far as I understand, when one computes amplitudes of various scattering processes the boundary conditions may depend on the choice of In and Out states.
Jun 24, 2016 at 9:42 comment added asv @IgorKhavkine: Let us consider the case $m=0$. Let $A_\nu$ be an EM field (it does not have to be free). When one computes various path integrals over $A_\nu$ it is necessary to fix a gauge. Let's fix the Lorentz gauge $\partial^\nu A_\nu=0$. One integrates over such fields satisfying some boundary conditions I would like to understand. One can still make a gauge transformation $A_\nu\mapsto A_\nu+\partial_\nu f$ where $\Box f=0$. One would like to have that the boundary conditions implied that $f=0$, i.e. there is no non-trivial gauge transformations.
Jun 24, 2016 at 9:32 comment added Igor Khavkine That's rather strange statement and it's hard to clearly understand what it means out of context. Can you provide a source where such a statement actually appears? One possible interpretation is that $u(x_0,x_i) = 0$ when $u(0,x_i) = 0$ and $\frac{\partial}{\partial x_0} u(0,x_i) = 0$, by the well-posedness of the initial value problem for the Klein-Gordon equation.
Jun 24, 2016 at 9:01 comment added Slereah In QFT it is usually either compact support funtions or Schwartz functions.
Jun 24, 2016 at 8:44 history asked asv CC BY-SA 3.0