Skip to main content
9 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Dec 8, 2023 at 10:05 vote accept gmvh
Mar 25, 2021 at 13:09 answer added Alex M. timeline score: 6
Mar 25, 2021 at 8:14 comment added Alex M. @gmvh: But! There is a "but"! Feynman integrals are "integrals" over spaces of paths only in quantum mechanics. In quantum field theory, they are "integrals" over spaces of fields, so in this case the connection with the "paths" breaks down. This is why I suggest to leave things as they are (and I shall maybe post this as an answer).
Mar 25, 2021 at 8:12 comment added Alex M. @gmvh: Since there are currently 17 questions tagged with "feynman-integral" and only 5 tagged with "path-integral" (of which one is about the Wiener measure!), I would make "path-integral" a synonym of "feynman-integral" and I would merge the tag information and tag wiki of "path-integral" into the tag information and tag wiki of "feynman-integral" (with the necessary modifications, of course).
Mar 25, 2021 at 5:44 comment added gmvh @AlexM.: but then the usage info and tag wiki for path-integral needs to be updated to reflect that greater generality. Currently, it (somewhat vaguely) describes the Feynman path integral.
Mar 25, 2021 at 0:02 comment added Alex M. @gvmh: The problem is that the Wiener integral is a "path integral", too; should we make it, too, a synonym of "path-integral"? Furthermore, unlike the Wiener integral, the Feynman integral is not a "true" integral. Organizing MO is important, but we should strive not to be zealous in doing so. I would keep these tags as they are now.
Mar 22, 2021 at 6:42 history became hot meta post
Mar 21, 2021 at 19:24 comment added YCor I agree in general that too close tags should be made synonyms (another example recently mentioned being lower-bounds and inequalities, see meta.mathoverflow.net/a/4907/14094)
Mar 20, 2021 at 12:37 history asked gmvh CC BY-SA 4.0