2002
DOI: 10.1088/0305-4470/35/44/304
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Boundary reduction formula

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
20
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2009
2009

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
1
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…one can see that this result is in a complete agreement with the formula obtained form the boundary state formalism previously (6). (The results in (A6, A7) should be multiplied by (−1) in case of computing the Casimir energy of fermionic fields, since their vacuum energy is − 1 2 ω(k)).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…one can see that this result is in a complete agreement with the formula obtained form the boundary state formalism previously (6). (The results in (A6, A7) should be multiplied by (−1) in case of computing the Casimir energy of fermionic fields, since their vacuum energy is − 1 2 ω(k)).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…The striking fact about the general formulae (5,6) is that they are manifestly finite, and only depend on physical quantities, such as the dispersion relation of asymptotic particles and their reflection amplitudes on the boundaries. This is even more emphasized in the boundary state formalism, where the bulk and boundary divergences appearing in usual derivations of the Casimir effect are manifestly absent, and the whole derivation is performed in terms of finite (renormalized) physical objects.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This corresponds to a particle propagating between the space time points (x 1 , t 1 ) and (x 2 , t 2 ). The second integral corresponds to a particle propagating between the same two points via the boundary where it is reflected and picks up the momentum dependent amplitude R(p), which is the equivalent to the R-matrix found using any other commonly used definitions, see [16]. The third term on the right of (12) arises from any boundary bound states of the system, such contributions will fall off to zero as x 1 → −∞ and x 2 → −∞ due to the localization of the boundary bound state particles close to the boundary.…”
Section: The Massive Klein-gordon Field With a Robin Boundarymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This variation of pole can be shown to be given by the particle-antiparticle FF F 1 ÿ 2 , and the change of the particles mass is given by [19] It is possible to argue in general that the time evolution of expectation values of some local observable operator in an initial state formed by a sudden quench will provide the information about the spectrum of the theory after this transition. One can indeed show [20] that the boundary reflection amplitude R k is related to the bulk Green function G x; x 0 ; t ÿ t 0 as G x; x 0 ; t ÿ t 0 R d! e ÿi!…”
mentioning
confidence: 92%