Timeline for How to correctly understand these "1-particle-irreducible insertions"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 5, 2017 at 15:58 | comment | added | Gold | now I see. If I just pick two diagrams with 2 1PI pieces and sum them, this won't turn out to be a product of the two sums with a propagator. This will happen only when we include them all, which is what the author meant. Is that the point? | |
| Jul 5, 2017 at 15:08 | comment | added | Javier | @user1620696 I've answered the edited part of your question. | |
| Jul 5, 2017 at 15:07 | history | edited | Javier | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 243 characters in body |
| Jul 5, 2017 at 3:03 | comment | added | Javier | Yes, that's correct. | |
| Jul 5, 2017 at 1:48 | comment | added | Gold | I think I'm getting it. So in the last figure I've posted, the first term is the bare propagator, the second is the sum over all 1PI diagrams, the third is the sum over all 2 pieces of 1PI's connected by a line and so forth. An arbitrary diagram is a string of 1PI's, so it will be inside some of these sums and we have them all. Is this the idea? | |
| Jul 4, 2017 at 20:54 | history | answered | Javier | CC BY-SA 3.0 |