Timeline for What's the point of Pauli's Exclusion Principle if time and space are continuous?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 24 at 17:25 | history | reopened |
glS Vincent Thacker Michael Seifert |
||
| Mar 24 at 15:30 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Mar 24 at 17:25 | |||||
| Jan 25 at 3:55 | history | closed |
hft Miyase Hyperon |
Needs details or clarity | |
| Jan 24 at 16:43 | comment | added | Aman pawar | Quantum States are discrete, exists in Hilbert spaces, whether or not space-time is. The principal only applies to fermions or fermions follow such principal otherwise there would be only bosons. And if you know, there are theories where space-time is discrete with notions of quanta length and quanta time called planck's length and planck's time. | |
| Jan 24 at 16:27 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jan 25 at 3:55 | |||||
| Nov 2, 2019 at 15:00 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ |
edited tags
|
|
| Oct 26, 2016 at 19:22 | comment | added | glS | @KevinFegan but what is a "local system"? In white dwarves for example, probably one of the systems in which Pauli's principle has the strongest effect, the electrons are effectively in a (degenerate) gas state, so not bound by any atom, molecule, or anything else. Unless you want in that case to consider the whole star as the "local system", but that's a bit of a stretch I think (can't you also consider the whole universe as a "local system"?) | |
| Oct 26, 2016 at 10:50 | comment | added | Kevin Fegan | My understanding is that is is more like "two identical fermions within the same local system (same atom, same molecule ...) cannot occupy the same quantum state". In other words, the Pauli Exclusion Principle only applies to small scale things, and certainly not to things of cosmic scale. | |
| Oct 26, 2016 at 10:12 | comment | added | N. Virgo | @JonCuster no it doesn't, because that's the point of the question. | |
| Oct 25, 2016 at 20:31 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPhysics/status/791014384948670465 | ||
| Oct 25, 2016 at 20:01 | history | protected | Qmechanic♦ | ||
| Oct 25, 2016 at 17:33 | history | edited | Yogi DMT | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 86 characters in body
|
| Oct 25, 2016 at 14:07 | vote | accept | Yogi DMT | ||
| Oct 25, 2016 at 13:45 | answer | added | ACuriousMind♦ | timeline score: 37 | |
| Oct 25, 2016 at 13:44 | history | edited | Yogi DMT | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 25 characters in body
|
| Oct 25, 2016 at 13:22 | history | edited | Yogi DMT | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
clarification
|
| Oct 25, 2016 at 13:08 | history | edited | glS | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 8 characters in body; edited title
|
| Oct 25, 2016 at 13:04 | comment | added | Christoph | bound systems come with discrete states even in continous spacetimes | |
| Oct 25, 2016 at 13:04 | answer | added | glS | timeline score: 63 | |
| Oct 25, 2016 at 13:02 | comment | added | Jon Custer | Your assertion in the second sentence needs to be backed up with physics, not gut feeling. | |
| Oct 25, 2016 at 12:49 | history | asked | Yogi DMT | CC BY-SA 3.0 |