- #1
pellman
- 684
- 5
... I hope.
I wasn't sure which math forum to put this into get an answer, but since the application is quantum, I figured this forum would be better.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grassmann_number
We see here that Grassman numbers have the property
[tex]\int [ \frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}f(\theta)]d\theta=0[/tex]
I don't see it. Suppose [tex]f(\theta)=a + b\theta[/tex].
Then [tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}f(\theta)=b[/tex]
And so
[tex]\int [ \frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}f(\theta)]d\theta=b\theta + constant[/tex]
right? At least that is what we would get with regular numbers. How does the anti-commutativity affect that?
I wasn't sure which math forum to put this into get an answer, but since the application is quantum, I figured this forum would be better.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grassmann_number
We see here that Grassman numbers have the property
[tex]\int [ \frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}f(\theta)]d\theta=0[/tex]
I don't see it. Suppose [tex]f(\theta)=a + b\theta[/tex].
Then [tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}f(\theta)=b[/tex]
And so
[tex]\int [ \frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}f(\theta)]d\theta=b\theta + constant[/tex]
right? At least that is what we would get with regular numbers. How does the anti-commutativity affect that?