>my fancy dandy symbols explain lidderally everyding
Ok then jackass, predict Mondays Powerball numbers with your gay little formula

>>16961165
a fucking integral? nigga the god equation isnt some explanatory equation of functions

>>16961165
>The action is minimized
Uhh akshually it says that the action has to be stationary

>>16961585
but when is it ever maximized doe?

>>16961539
There is a huge misconception in mathematical physics but that's not really a continuous integral. Reason is that when you expand L in its Taylor series and group the coefficients together to the corresponding terms (linear, quadratic, etc.), you don't need to integrate (yet). One can use the power rule to find the conditions when the first, second, etc. variations vanish and you only integrate at the end step to make the total derivatives vanish but these are actually discrete (telescoping) sums. So the integral sign only appears to get rid of the boundaries, we don't care what the integral of L really is or if it even exists.

>>16963436
>There is a huge misconception in mathematical physics because that's not really a continuous integral.
fixed

>>16961165
Very cool. What's your Lagrangian?
>>16963436
That's not a "huge misconception", but rather a technicality that any mathematical physicist could explain to you (if they cared enough, which they probably wouldn't).

>>16963466
>That's not a "huge misconception",
It is, every book undergrad book begins with integral of L as a first step, almost as if it's a given fact lol

>>16963472
So what? It's not important. You can convert between an integral and finite "realistic" versions easily under reasonable assumptions. It's not a misconception but rather a standard and well-understood formalism. Calling it a "misconception" is pedantic and idiotic.

>>16963475
>You can convert between an integral and finite "realistic" versions easily under reasonable assumptions.
You're the pedantic one since introducing the integral means adding an entire new layer of complexity that deals with domain, range, convergence, etc. for something that's ultimately a problem of algebra. It is important, because in formal power series you can solve for what are otherwise divergent Lagrangians. You're a noob

>>16963482
You can't do shit without the integral. You're a larper.
>domain, range, convergence, etc
These are not layers of complexity. They are simple mathematical concepts that should not be a problem for anyone studying physics at this level. If they are you need to go back and do some more calculus.

>>16963493
Go ahead and tell us precisely what convergence is fren.
>can’t do shit without the integral
like what?

>>16961165
Ok, what is [eqn] \mathcal{L} [/eqn] then?