Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
New stub holonomic quantum field. Very deep relation between monodromy involving approach to integrable systems and a class of QFTs has been discovered in Japan in 1970s.
Urs, i am still working on the entry...
Edit: there is no single idea in the article yet. Hence title idea not appropriate.
Edit 2: I think the tables of contents are useful once the article is long, say longer than a screen page. When it is shorter it is in my opinion just ugly :) to have several big titles and big fonts hiding and treatening the small little text ;(, and messing the visual memories of visual people (say my own). I hope the entry holonomic quantum fields grows soon to long enough to deserve its own toc though :) !!
sure, no prob. Just added section titles.
Don't forget to link differential equation and integrable system and the like
I added HQF V. All V and supplement are downloadable. The supplement has opposite order of the authors for some reason. The studies have occasionally some other authors, not the three from HQF I/V. Thanks for the tip about diff eqs (I had linked before integrable systems and the link disappeared probably when we both edited the entry).
I disagree that most mathematicians know what differential equation is. We know in some simple cases. To know this in bigger generality, we should know a lot -- say what a solution of a diff. equation is, and for that we need to define things like weak solutions etc. which are in general a difficult problem.
Question: in renormalization there is also some Riemann-Hilbert problem involved, who knows if it can be somehow remotely related to the business of the now classical Japanese discovery...
Let me know if I messed one of the many links to articles in series holonomic...I hope somebody will peek at them. I spent few evenings reading these last year, it was very enjoyable, but I forgot most of it and never really understood much more than introduction. Actually I also had that book first in hands as physics undergraduate many years ago, and I looked at the text which was at that time totally incomprehensible to me, but by some features it looked to me like "this is real mathematical physics. I would like to understand that one day." I would never guess that after so many years I would still not be done with the task, and mainly not even up to it :)
1 to 5 of 5