CHM
Reputation
Next privilege 125 Rep.
Vote down
 Jun 3 awarded Notable Question Apr 15 comment Producing photons with same frequency, different amplitude wave @EvgeniSergeev Cute =) It's been 3 years, but looking back I'm still surprised they marked mine instead of the other even if I had asked it 7 months earlier. Oct 22 comment Producing photons with same frequency, different amplitude wave @BenCrowell My question was asked first, how can I have written a duplicate? Sep 24 awarded Autobiographer Feb 3 comment What does it mean that the Higgs has a nonzero vacuum expectation value? That there is a probability for a particle to "emerge" out of the vaccuum? Jan 30 comment Probability current density : Isn't there something wrong with this proof? Griffith's 2nd Ed problem 1.14. Nov 18 awarded Popular Question Oct 23 awarded Scholar Oct 23 accepted Determining Fourier Coefficients by inspection Oct 22 comment Determining Fourier Coefficients by inspection The transform I get is in terms of exponentials while my teacher says we should get Dirac Deltas. He told us this comes from the fact that there are "obvious" boundary conditions our transform has to meet. Oct 21 asked Determining Fourier Coefficients by inspection Oct 21 comment Jacobian, Lorentz and Fourier Transformation Clear and to the point. Thanks. Sep 29 comment Wavefunction normalization So when Marder (Condensed Matter Physics, 2nd) writes that solutions of the free-particle Schrödinger equation are $$\Psi_{\vec{k}} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{V}}\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\vec{k}\cdot\vec{r}}$$ he implies that we'll be using LCs of them? Or is it an error? $$\left[\frac{\vec{r}}{V}\right]_{-\infty}^\infty$$ is either indefinite or infinity. He states that the plane wave solutions are normalized, which bothers me... maybe I'm missing something in his argument. Sep 3 comment Why is a nucleus isotropic? Which is exactly what he meant. $360 \equiv 0\ \text{mod}\ 360$. So in your example $1080 \equiv 360\ \text{mod}\ 360$ Sep 1 awarded Altruist Sep 1 comment Where can a good treatment of the 'sudden' perturbation approximation be found? My own research led me to Bohm's Quantum Theory book, which has a chapter on the subject: > 20- Sudden and Adiabatic Approximations Aug 31 awarded Citizen Patrol Aug 27 awarded Excavator Aug 27 comment Where can a good treatment of the 'sudden' perturbation approximation be found? @RonMaimon I've asked a related question here, if you're interested. I thought this question should deserve its own answer, since only a comment was posted! Aug 27 awarded Organizer