Talk:Chiral anomaly

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Physics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of low importance within physics.

Help with this template This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

I get the impression you're just adding random links to papers containing the phrase "chiral anomaly" and not to introductory papers on chiral anomaly. Phys 17:35, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Not really random, but neither introductary. Feel free to change or delete. If I would have a good introductary paper, I would have put it on the top. I'm doing title searches at arxiv.org and then read the papers and link to the (IMHO) best matches. Even as this doesn't yield introductary papers, it gives further reading where the topic is of interest.
I apologize if you consider these papers bad matches.
Pjacobi 17:54, 2005 Jan 11 (UTC)
I'm sorry. But I still think arxiv isn't exactly the best place for introductory papers. Most of the papers there are on research. Phys 19:00, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
It would be helpful to explain your assumption that introductory papers are good and research papers are not good. It is not evident to me that this is a shared assumption. --Tagishsimon (talk)
I guess I didn't make my point clearly enough. I did not say research papers are not good. What I intended to write was research papers often don't make good introductory papers. But clearly, reading research papers is necessary for someone working in the field. Phys 19:30, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I believe that the chiral anomaly does not need to involve gauge fields at all. Many examples of interesting theories with chiral anomalies DO have gauge fields (such as the baryon number violation example in this article). However, the lack of a necessary connection means that this article is a bit misleading at the moment. Any objections to a rewrite? matt 12 July 2005