« first day (5225 days earlier)   

00:00
As in what recently have you been curious/reading about
 
3 hours later…
02:58
God damn gpt...
 
2 hours later…
05:08
@TobiasFünke here is an example of a paper i mean journals.aps.org/pra/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevA.54.656
They state the $\langle N \rangle$ in equation (4), but it is rather unexplicit (it is just the series representation of the polylog of order 3)
I think the complexity in obtaining an exact expression for $\langle N \rangle$ is in dealing with the degeneracy factor for each energy level of an anisotropic harmonic well, which is why I think there are no exact expressions.
Also, if you open up pathria & beale (~page 208 in my edition), you find a discussion of BEC in an anisotropic harmonic well and they too split off the ground state contribution to $\langle N \rangle$ and then approximate the rest using an approximate density of states.
also the above paper i guess is treating an isotropic well
 
2 hours later…
07:36
i think society and life is going to be unrecognisable a few decades from now
even more so than modern life is unrecognisable compared to 1950s life
it is because of technology
07:47
@User198 if you mean e.g. spin operators, then the result is some-times called Jordan-Wigner theorem
@TobiasFünke interesting
is this like some general result about a relationship between hilbert spaces and lie algebras
i thought the relationship was just representation theory
but one needs hermitian representations, so maybe the relationship can get deeper
08:14
@User198 and for a finite-dimensional single-particle state, also the CAR/CCR on the corresponding Fock spaces are equivalent (given some mathematical conditions, similar to SvN)
Arai's book on inequivalent representations could be of interest
@Allie Have you not seen a coherent fuller derivation? The "real" system has a dispersion relation that looks like $\omega\propto\left|\sin ka\right|$ that only exists for $k$ between $\pm\dfrac\pi{2a}$ and nowhere else. The Debye continuum approximation is merely equivalent to taking the small $k$ linearisation limit and extrapolating it outwards. This means that, yes, this linearisation limit has to terminate abruptly.
@Allie No, the difference simply doesnt matter. Real world crystals have finite sizes and not infinite sizes.
...I meant CAR (not CCR), because for a finite-dimensional single-particle space, the Fock space is also finite-dimensional for fermions. CCR of course needs infinite-dimensional Hilbert spaces
08:33
Does this make any sense to you? If $J\to0$ the field approaches $v$ as it is stated. Of course the first term is zero because $\delta\Gamma/\delta\phi=0$, but then every term of the series is zero if $J=0$ because $J=0\implies\overline{\phi}=v$ and so $\overline{\phi}-v=0$
I mean, okay, if $J=0$ the $N=1$ is zero because of $(12.45)$, but so is every other term of $(12.44)$ because of the $[\overline{\phi}(x_i)-v]$ factors
08:57
how can $v=\bar \phi$ and $v=\lim \bar \phi$?
it is confusing to me, but I don't know too much about vertex functions etc. Which book is this from?
@SillyGoose thanks, but I cannot open it right now. My point was that the derivation of the bosonic partition function in the GCE is standard textbook knowledge (as you seem to know?), but not necessarily so in the CE. In any case, I would not expect even for the HO in the GCE an analytical expression for most quantities. But as far as I've understood you, you have one for the chemical potential and or the PF?
perhaps this is of interest:
0
Q: Degeneracy of states in an ensemble of $N$ harmonic oscillators in $d$ dimensions

TomSIn the canonical ensemble consisting of $N$ independent harmonic oscillators in $d$ spatial dimensions one has to evaluate sums like $$ \sum_n \ldots e^{-\beta E_n} = \sum_E g_E \ldots e^{-\beta E} $$ where $n$ labels the states, $E$ labels energies and $g_E(N,d)$ is the degeneracy of the energy ...

09:13
@TobiasFünke when I wrote that, it is implied by $J=0$. The limit is taken as $J\to0$
@TobiasFünke a set of notes online
@Feynmate no I meant at the very beginning of the chapter
and then after eq. 12.44
is it by K. Cahill? I remember the font lol
or Fradkin
yeah it is also covered in Fradkin's book
@TobiasFünke Oh, you're right; I don't know
09:28
yeah the notation is confusing
ah no, that does not make sense I am afraid
09:58
i got rid of the hot network questions sidebar and phew it's so much nicer, I should have done it sooner!
10:10
Agreed 👍 they generate more heat than light 🕯️
why nicer? :d
I mean it is just at the right hand side, and does not take too much space, no?
But, as they say, some like it hot🔥
> The movie. Banned in China: Upon its original release, Kansas banned the film from being shown in the state, explaining that cross-dressing was "too disturbing for Kansans".
I find it a bit distracting and I seldom care about the topics/questions on there. it seems that for me it got replaced by a list of recent badges and tags as well (?) not sure if they were always there... i don't think I noticed them before
@ACuriousMind Hm. I meant to ask: "Does there exist than some "relation" for finite-dimensional Hilbert spaces, or do they don't have one at all."
@TobiasFünke Ah ok. Thank you.
1.) How do we know the dimension of the Hilbert space we are working in? Is it the number of dimensions of the $\psi(x)$?

For $N$ dimensional Hilbert space $\psi$ will be a vector of dimension $N$ and when $\psi(x)$ is a function (i.e. a infinite-dimensional vector) than the dimension of Hilbert space will be also infinite?
2.) When we have $[A,H]=0$ than that operator $A$ commutes with the Hamiltonian and the quantity is conserved and also we can measure one without distrurbing the measurment of the other. Cool.

I found out of examples: $[x,p_y]=0$
$[L^2,H]=0$ - for Hydrogen atom (spherically symetric)

Do you know of any more examples (maybe less known) ?
10:26
@qwerty no, I only have watched tags (additionally to the HNQ)
yeah i prefer the recent tags/badges
@User198 without any judging: your questions seem sooo random ^^
1. What do you mean by "know the dimensions"?
There are vector spaces. There is the notion of dimensions. You can check if a specific vector space has a specific dimension (at least all examples I know can be checked ;))
But no, not all function spaces are infinite-dimensional. The vector space of polynomials of degree $n$ is $n$-dimensional (vector space operations are the canonical ones).
@User198 $[H,P]=0$ for translationally invariant systems... and there are many more examples...
@User198 e.g. the total charge operator in QFT commutes with the Hamiltonian. this also means charge is conserved over time
I think I got it. The effective action is a functional of $\phi_c$, $\Gamma[\phi_c]$. The classical field $\overline{\phi}$, i.e. the one that reduces to $v$ in the zero current limit, is only the solution to the EoM,
$\frac{\delta\Gamma}{\delta \phi_c}\bigg\rvert_{\phi_0}=-J(x)$. Now we're working with fixed current (i.e. $\phi_0$ is a function of $J$), so sending it to zero we get the desired result. $\phi_c$ is just an arbitrary variable
@Feynmate what physics do u intend to focus on once u started doing physics as hobby?
10:38
I don't know. I hate thinking about the future, the present is painful enough
Great, now I sound like an emo
i have a list of topics
but u can learn whatever u like, physics or not physics
@Feynmate embrace your inner emo
u might also want to expand to other knowledge
i think, even now, u just indendently learn most things instead of learning in university classes
@TobiasFünke I know xD soorry.
@TobiasFünke Ok thanks
@RyderRude Thanks
@User198 what is your view of how physics relates to the ontology
u said u dont believe in absolute truths, so u may just dismiss any discussions of ontology
10:56
Hm. I dont know if they are related.
Physics just models reality via approximations so it can not give any absolute answer (what ever that means).

And ontology asks questions that I think will never be answered xD.
@RyderRude What is your view?

« first day (5225 days earlier)