@JohnRennie Once experiment is conducted, and data is recorded, that point onward, everything is about data but should still remain about physics, isn't it?
@kpv to a degree these are judgemnt calls and different people will reach different conclusions. But if a data analysis question didn't have anything that made it especially relevant to a physics expt I'd say it was out of place here.
@2physics Basically yes. When you start looking in detail at what exactly an electron is it turns out to be a very strange object indeed. It is certainly not the usual classical idea of a point particle.
ACM has tried several times to explain to me exactly how particles emerge from quantum field theory, but even now my grasp on the concept is a bit tenuous.
@0celo7 I was studying introduction to complete analysis. and I couldn't remember many things in advanced calculus. one of them is: if the union set of x' and (x',x] equivalent to the set [x',x]
@kpv incidentally, publishing on Vixra will destroy your career unless you're already so well known and famous you can get away with it. Everyone in the physics world will automatically assume you're a crackpot if you publish on Vixra.
@0celo7 I mean suppose I have a tensor, if I transform the coordinates from some inertial frame to an accelerated frame, will the tensor remains invariant in general?
@0celo7 ok to be more specific, suppose my tensor is the stress energy tensor, will it remain invariant in an accelerated frame compared to when in an inertial frame
@JohnRennie This is relavent to whether measurement outcomes of entangled pairs remain independent over time, or not. How this can not be related to physics. Thanks for the information about vixra. I am not affiliated to any institution so have no way to post it elswhere. I am not looking to build a career in the field though. Just trying to remove my doubts so that I can believe in quantum weirdness. Without actually verifying, I can not.
mayeb similar to how when we do coordinate transformations in vectors and tensors, the components will change under some transformation rule, but the geoemtric object as a whole remains unchanged
@JohnRennie I get your point. But as I said, I am trying to verify my own doubts and I am also not looking to build any credibility either. Just seeking answer to specific questions. Moreover, I do not have any options other than vixra. Could you suggest some.
@2physics The basic principles of QM and relativity are completely disjoint. Quantum field theory is what you get when you want to do special relativistic QM. The proper way to do general relativistic QM is unknown.
@Sanya Well, based on what johnrennie and 0celo7 said, it seems most GR tensors work fine in accelerated frames as they are covariant. However I am not sure if the continuum mechanics tensors can be generalised to GR ones
@Secret the problem is usually the derivative of a tensor - or a non-tensor so to speak because the object does not have the tensor transformation properties, that is the core of the problem in the end
Smoothness in Banach spaces does make sense. You can define differentation in the usual Frechet way, and since the space of linear operators between two Banach spaces is itself Banach you can iterate this to define smoothness.
@2physics I suggest you to read that log when I and ACM discuss about magic. If you can underrstand that, it means you are somehow similar to me in my worldview (thus does not require those cues)
Which ironically is not kinda good because it turns out it is people who said they don't understood me understood me more than anyone else including myself
People who are at odds with my view but not antagonistic, in some sense understood me better than most people including myself because they are unaffected by that chrisma side effect of me when I talk passioonately about something and thus can see deep into personality traits that I am not aware of
@2physics Well it will either mean we are doomed (because something is unstable), or we need to start think in a way throwing causlaity out of the window
Well then you are not alone, my text communication skills is a WIP. but basically that sentence is saying people who think differently than me, tend to be better at picking out habits I don't aware within myself
@0celo7 Not exactly. Compactness means that every sequence has a convergent subsequence, so you construct a sequence where the distance of every element to every other element is larger than some fixed $\epsilon$, so no subsequence can be Cauchy.
I will never say I completely understood anything because to be qualified for that, I will need to be able to answer any question in that field with ZERO errors
I might start to have more physics questions for ACM once I took care of that PhD application forms and continue to read classical mechanics theoretical minimum
@2physics it is tiring because msot things are simply unrealistic, but when you can doen it, a sense of accomplishment
@ACuriousMind Am I just supposed to know that $$\int dx\,\exp\left(-\frac{(x-2i(k-p'/\hbar))^2}{2d^2}\right)=\int dx\,\exp\left(-\frac{x^2}{2d^2}\right)$$
@ACuriousMind Looks like only you can help now. Is there a way that I can satisfy your expectations to have the hold removed and get the question answered. You are right, I do not believe in QM workings (only in case of entanglement correlations) but would like to remove my doubts so I can believe. Or if reasonable, can raise more doubts. Please let me know.
At the physics level of rigor, it is just substitution. You're formally correct, but I think you're approaching these problems with the wrong mindset - this is a QM class, not analysis.
@DavidZ: I agree, I kind of forced myself to use that word. But is it polite to not even respond to someone waiting for your response? What would you call that behavior?
@kpv But don't worry on it, they could probably even expel you from here if they had really wanted it, a little bit of ignorance is not the world. Actually, the community would profit from it, if not they would be in its centre, and this is what they get with this ignore.
It's not even necessarily passive-aggressive. Sometimes people just walk away from the computer or just can't think of a good response, or any of many other things.
@DavidZ He was there responding to others, I asked if he was going to respond, he could have said some other time, but no response. That is explicit ignoring, it is kind of insulting but I would not feel it that way.
@ACuriousMind that might well be, but I feel like it still needs a bit of talking and discussing and the meta is a bad place to get a brainstorm-discussion
I will ask the question in terms of an observation on a hypothetical coin toss experiment.
If you like, you may answer the question based upon the coin toss description alone.
For little more curious and patient readers, I have provided link to a paper that I wrote about an observation on an ac...
I will ask the question in terms of an observation on a hypothetical coin toss experiment.
If you like, you may answer the question based upon the coin toss description alone.
For little more curious and patient readers, I have provided link to a paper that I wrote about an observation on an ac...
@kpv To be frank, it's still not particularly clear exactly how the imbalance is defined. This is a single experiment? Or is it four independent experiments? You jump all over the place.
Similarly, is the imbalance defined as (heads-tails)/(heads+tails)? If there are four experiments, are the coins the same (i.e. "heads" corresponds with "heads" on all experiments)? Are you still defining the imbalance as (heads-tails)/(heads+tails) then, or do you switch to (tails-heads)/(heads+tails)?
These are the sort of details which would be very easy to make crystal clear but you somehow don't
I'm not saying that fixing this would fix the question, which is improved but I still think does not pass the bar.
You also don't need any more interaction from me - all you need is five 3k+ users (any such users) to agree that this is reopen-worthy.
@kpv You don't 'reach them'. You hope that people will see your question and agree, and there is a review queue where people will see the question.
And (assuming the question should actually be reopened) if not enough people see it, then use that as a prompt to get the question right the first time.
If you edit the question you can ping me here, just keep in mind that people are busy and you're not entitled to any response as such.
