Paper detail

Equivalence of zeta function technique and Abel-Plana formula in regularizing the Casimir energy of hyper-rectangular cavities

Zeta function regularization is an effective method to extract physical significant quantities from infinite ones. It is regarded as mathematically simple and elegant but the isolation of the physical divergency is hidden in its analytic continuation. By contrast, Abel-Plana formula method permits explicit separation of divergent terms. In regularizing the Casimir energy for a massless scalar field in a $D$-dimensional rectangular box, we give the rigorous proof of the equivalence of the two methods by deriving the reflection formula of Epstein zeta function from repeatedly application of Abel-plana formula and giving the physical interpretation of the infinite integrals. Our study may help with the confidence of choosing any regularization method at convenience among the frequently used ones, especially the zeta function method, without the doubts of physical meanings or mathematical consistency.

preprint2014arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.