last day (15 days later) » 

apt45
apt45
15:41
Hi puppetsock
Let's continue here
I guess we have different setups in mind. I tried to explain it better in the question
Can you please show me how you get $\square f=0$ from Eq.(2) ?
puppetsock
puppetsock
I don't. You specified it. You said it was the $\square$ zero part of $\pi$.
apt45
apt45
but that's not an on-shell statement
puppetsock
puppetsock
How did you get $f = -\phi$?
apt45
apt45
I showed you the computation in the edited question
Eq(4)
Hi @CAF. Are you interested?
puppetsock
puppetsock
Um... No. You just claimed it. You didn't show it at all.
apt45
apt45
15:48
If someone would give you Eq.(2), how you would conclude that $\square f = 0$? You need to get this information from the EOM
Euler-Lagrangian equation for $f(x)$
it's a trivial computation
puppetsock
puppetsock
So you want to get the $\square f=0 $ part of a function from the EOM for that funciton?
apt45
apt45
why is this so important?
puppetsock
puppetsock
What?
apt45
apt45
that's not the problem of my question, because I indeed get $\square f = 0$.
puppetsock
puppetsock
So, that's what I said in my answer.
apt45
apt45
15:52
No, at all.
puppetsock
puppetsock
You divided pi into phi and f.
You specified square f = -
apt45
apt45
Ok, so I give you another teory
puppetsock
puppetsock
= 0
apt45
apt45
wait
I give you another teory
puppetsock
puppetsock
...
apt45
apt45
15:53
-1/2(\partial \chi)^2 -c^2(\chi + \lambda)^2. Can you tell me where is the pole of the propagator of $\chi"?
$\chi$ e $\lambda$ are scalar fields
puppetsock
puppetsock
What are you talking about?
apt45
apt45
I am talking about a scalar field theory
puppetsock
puppetsock
Look dude. I'm beginning to suspect a Poe here.
apt45
apt45
why?
puppetsock
puppetsock
Ok, I have exceeded the time I am willing to spend on this. Bye.
apt45
apt45
15:57
bye

last day (15 days later) »