408 reputation
111
bio website
location
age
visits member for 1 year, 5 months
seen 53 mins ago

Apr
9
reviewed Approve suggested edit on Functional integral aproach for Feynman rules
Apr
9
asked Functional integral aproach for Feynman rules
Mar
29
accepted Symmetries in physics
Mar
23
asked Symmetries in physics
Mar
17
accepted Constraints of massive relativistic point particle in hamiltonian mechanics
Feb
4
comment Integral in $n$−dimensional euclidean space
@William As you can see, he mentioned it: "Also I see that this integral is Fourier transform of <...>, but I failed here too, because I can't find Fourier pair in my reference books."
Dec
19
comment Constraints of massive relativistic point particle in hamiltonian mechanics
Okay, will try to fully realize this. Thanks for the answer and for mention of gauges. <3
Dec
19
comment Constraints of massive relativistic point particle in hamiltonian mechanics
Sry, I misunderstood. Of course you are right, that $\lambda=\lambda(t)$. But can you explain, why you did not consider constraint $p_{e}=0$ (by introducing the corresponding lagrange multiplier) when you wrote hamiltonian?
Dec
18
comment Some small questions about quantum spin and rotations
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
Dec
18
comment Constraints of massive relativistic point particle in hamiltonian mechanics
Okay, I will try to explain precisely. Thanks for your explanation, I have heard about it a bit. But i wanted to use standart Dirac's approach: I obtained momentum, then identified the type of constraint $\phi$, wrote $H=H_{0}+\lambda \phi$. As I remember, Dirac in his lectures said that $\lambda=\lambda(x,p)$. Then I wrote the Hamilton equations using poisson brackets and hoped to determine from them $\lambda$ and equations of motion, which should have been matched with those that was obtained from the Lagrange's equations. Why in this approach I can use $\lambda=\lambda(t)?$
Dec
18
comment Constraints of massive relativistic point particle in hamiltonian mechanics
Excuse me, сan you clarify why $\lambda$ does not depend on the canonical variables, but only depends on time? I obtained hamiltonian which has the same form as your's $(6)$, but I thought that $\lambda=\lambda(x,p)$, while you said $\lambda=\lambda(t)$. Can you explain why?
Dec
18
revised Constraints of massive relativistic point particle in hamiltonian mechanics
edited body
Dec
17
revised Constraints of massive relativistic point particle in hamiltonian mechanics
added 6 characters in body
Dec
17
revised Constraints of massive relativistic point particle in hamiltonian mechanics
added 6 characters in body
Dec
17
revised Constraints of massive relativistic point particle in hamiltonian mechanics
deleted 55 characters in body
Dec
17
asked Constraints of massive relativistic point particle in hamiltonian mechanics
Nov
20
comment Free path distribution
@NijankowskiV. Thank you for your response! I don't understand one moment in your link. Why K. Huang use the most probable speed of a molecula in formulae $\lambda=\frac{n}{2Z} \bar{v}$ (5.2)instead of the average speed?
Nov
20
revised Free path distribution
edited body
Nov
19
awarded  Custodian
Nov
19
reviewed Reject suggested edit on Free path distribution