 No, I will explain why, okay, this model is very good for analytical, to study it analytically. It's very bad for really doing numerical simulation really with this model, why? It's very difficult and computer expensive to generate fields which are isotropic in high dimensions. In two dimensions it's not a problem, in three it's also not, but in high dimension generically there is no good algorithm. It's extremely almost prohibitively difficult to generate homogeneous and isotropic random fields. Therefore literally for this model it's not good for simulations, but if I have time, which I'm not sure, in the end I will indicate that some other models probably belong to the same universality class and they can be simulated and then one can study. Sorry, you mean N is not entering here? What is your question? You mean N of this parameter? No, I don't think so. It depends on how you normalize, but I think that as I define them they are really this, without further things. And then it's equivalent to this representation. I don't think that really there are extra factors here. But we can check separately then. No, I think that I checked it's correct.