« first day (2398 days earlier)      last day (2521 days later) » 

12:15 AM
@BernardoMeurer cc @JaimeGallego it looks fine...
Was there an old one? I actually don't remember it
 
Ah, gotcha, from last year's ad thread.
I do like that your new one is cleaner than the old one.
Though there does seem to be quite a bit of whitespace between the different pieces of the image
 
I need to add a border though
 
vzn
@JaimeGallego re nighthawks, was wondering, why an "incredible" painting?
 
12:31 AM
@vzn I couldn't explain. It's probably the colors, the simplicity, the atmosphere.
And painted in 1942.
It was very innovative for its age.
 
vzn
@BernardoMeurer looks great thx! looking fwd to it... ps didnt know youre a P vs NP fan, have an entire section on it... also recommend fortnows recent book :) vzn1.wordpress.com/category/p-vs-np ... your toaster cpu reminds me of a hackerspace prj, an IoT mousetrap that sends a msg when it catches something :)
@JaimeGallego so have you studied some art history? was enjoying some art myself yesterday at fair...
 
 
4 hours later…
user228700
5:03 AM
Hi, everyone :-)
 
Morning
 
Hello.
4 hours later...
 
Water isn't compressible, right? So if I was to put an open barrel of water at room temperature inside a tube with a little less pressure than the atmosphere has, would the water remain at the same height inside the barrel?
 
5:20 AM
Water is compressible, just not very compressible like a gas.
 
So the water would rise slightly?
 
We measure the compressibility of a material by its bulk modulus. A totally incompressible material would have a bulk modulus of infinity.
Water has a high bulk modulus but not infinite.
 
My next question would have been, if it takes energy to get a barrel of water in and out of a pipe which has slightly less pressure
 
@pZombie The water would rise slightly, but by an amount so small the rise would be hard to detect.
 
yes, but even if it rises slightly, it would seem to mean that I would have to put energy into getting it in and out of the pipe with slightly less pressure
 
5:24 AM
Yes, but in practice the difference would be undetectably small
 
well, I was thinking about putting some water at room temperature at about 25°C, inside a pipe with low pressure where water boils at about 20°C.
Connect the steam at the top to some other curled up pipes which are led through the water itself, and open valves which push several different sized magnetic balls through those pipes.
the energy for pushing those magnetic balls around some copper coils and generating energy, would have to be subtracted from the water. Hence the water would cool down
When it cools back down to initial levels, I was thinking to pull out the water and replace it with new water at 25°C
Since if this would work, I assume it would already have been done. So I am trying to figure out where my thinking went wrong
basically a pipe with low pressure that has a valve of shutter at the bottom. You place a barrel below it, then open the shutter, connecting the barrel to the "low pressure chamber"... shut the valve again once the water inside the barrel has cooled down, and pull the barrel out... repeat
Since this probably does not work as I imagine it, there has to be some error in how imagine the dynamics of this system considering the energy would be.
 
 
2 hours later…
7:45 AM
"The signature is taken to be +---"
>:|
 
angry reacts only
 
Hey @BalarkaSen
 
I'm trying to learn about string theory, but then they start throwing around the orthosymplectic group
So I have to learn more SUSY
 
did string theory predict the outcome of any experiments more accurately than current other theories?
 
7:50 AM
Not as far as I know
 
sounds like crazy shit
 
are there any predictions string theory makes which diverge from predictions of current theories and which could eventually be tested in experiments?
 
I am learning about it, so I can't tell
@ACuriousMind might know
Though of course, there's the whole compactification thing
So we would probably need to narrow down the compactification before we can really make good predictions
 
8:12 AM
Is there a supersymmetric principal bundle?
Some kind of superframe bundle
 
8:43 AM
Probably
@Slereah Hurr durr transport coefficients from AdS/CFT haha
 
I'm sure that's a hilarious joke to someone
 
there is some way of calculating some weird statistical physics quantity
using AdS/CFT
and it gives some outcome which is better than the standard model
 
neat
 
but it's hardly a direct prediction of string theory
 
Hello $\hbar$!
Does anyone around know how to insert footnotes in answers?
Unless I'm missing something, the formatting page doesn't mention that !+?
 
8:56 AM
There is no proper footnote facility - you have to cheat
 
How sir?
 
I generally manually insert the footnote number using ${}^n$, then at the bottom of the answer insert a horizontal line, and below that the footnotes.
 
Hahaha...
 
or just put it in parenthesis you walnut
 
:: Sigh ::
 
8:59 AM
I guess the super principal bundle would have the superspace bundle as an associated bundle :p
 
^ I assume that's a response to Danu, and not to this walnut ...
 
@Slereah Walnut? Is that the insult du jour
 
OK Thanks guys.
 
9:15 AM
What is $\mathcal N$ in SUSY anyway
Is it the grading of the algebra or something
 
Morning folks
 
@BernardoMeurer Morning :)
 
Morning :-)
 
Morning for you :P
:)
 
What are y'all up to in this rainy morning?
 
9:25 AM
Looking at supergravity
 
@BernardoMeurer Currently making porridge. May or may not get round to doing some revision for my (last ever!) exam on Wednesday. Also may or may not get round to doing all the other stuff (essay, project, a bit of writing, another bit of writing etc.) I have to do, as it's a Bank Holiday :)
 
@BernardoMeurer Gazing at Physics Meta in amazement at a person who ran Linux on a toaster ...
I hope by a "toaster" you don't mean a laptop which generates a lot of heat :P
 
@TheDarkSide He didn't really run Linux on a toaster - he just plugged a raspberry pi in, which I consider cheating :P
 
@TheDarkSide Glad you liked it, lol
@Mithrandir24601 To be entirely fair it wasn't even a raspberry pi, it was just some ARM SoC-based board like an RPi
 
@Mithrandir24601 Hehehe.
 
9:29 AM
And the nice thing was that the toaster was controlled by the board!
I had my toasting managed by a cron job!
 
@BernardoMeurer Hmm... That's not so badly cheating then, I suppose... :P
 
@Mithrandir24601 I dream about doing my last exam ever every night
Actually that's not true, I dream that I solved P vs. NP more
 
@BernardoMeurer There will come a time in your life when it actually happens. And it's pretty exciting after 9 years of some form of exams :D
 
I bloody hate exams
I hate them so much I broke my professor's exam format last semester
 
So do I :/ I'm terrible at them. Just cannot do them in time. At all
@BernardoMeurer What did you do?..
 
9:35 AM
Our grade was divided in a lab part, which was some really freaking hard VHDL projects and an exams part
I scored a 19/20 on the lab
and a 10/20 on the exam
so the professor was SURE that I was somehow cheating
and they all went nuts
but it was just me being bad at exams :P
 
9:47 AM
Yeah, in my (undergrad) finals, the examiner made a remark that my computational physics exercise mark was high, but most of my exam marks were mediocre, with a couple of acceptable marks... I then did an MSc and my marks exploded upwards :P
 
10:04 AM
I am looking at naked things
"A spacetime is nakedly singular if there is a point $p \in M$ and a future-incomplete timelike or null geodesic $\gamma$ such that $\gamma \subset I^-(p)$"
 
Hello. Do anyone here know the best video channel to learn Chemistry for grade XI and XII?
 
SBM
Chemistry SE has a resources section maybe @GerWyn
 
10:19 AM
Wohoo GCC 7 is out!
 
SBM
5
Q: Resources for learning Chemistry

pH13 - Yet another PhilippBased on various other Stack exchange site (Mandarin Chinese, Russian and German), we adapt this project here for chemistry, since it's a great idea to have all kinds of resources in one place. This is a specifically created Community Wiki which gathers resources for learning Chemistry. The list...

GCC is 30 years old
now
Though installing GCC 7 on cygwin is awful
 
Cygwin is black magic
Just use the Linux subsystem
Or just run Linux
 
you mean the new linux subsystem they added in win10 when you enable developer mode?
 
SBM
I wish I had windows 10
 
@pZombie Yes.
 
10:32 AM
I am not sure if you could do anything with the WLS you can do with cygwin
 
@pZombie You can do literally everything you do in cygwin with the Linux Subsystem
It's actually pretty nice
The only bad thing is it runs on Windows
 
then again, I don't really know exactly what cygwin or mingw does other than me having used them at times trying to compile some programs from source to work under windows
 
cygwin is a POSIX compatibility layer for the WIN32API, that's all I know
 
SBM
I'm not sure I could dual boot or run VMs
 
Why couldn't you dualboot?
 
10:35 AM
for simple stuff, why would you want to dual boot if you can just run virtualbox?
or even simpler stuff that requires no desktop , just use the linux subsystem
 
SBM
Dual boot'd slow the system down.
WLS is available only on Windows 10
 
@SBM Dual boot has no impact on your system speed
@pZombie Because you don't want to run Microsoft malware :)
 
SBM
oh okay will need to borrow a distro
 
borrow?
 
SBM
Distros are big downloads. I have a 2gb data limit every month
 
10:54 AM
A Riemannian metric tensor defined a Riemannian metric, but is the converse true?
 
I think the Cygnus A supermassive black hole binary will be a good place to check for gravitational waves for the next step
 
11:07 AM
@Secret Did you mean Sagittarius A* or Cygnus X-1 ?
Oh, you mean the galaxy Cygnus A?
Why would the galaxy emit gravitational waves?
 
Uh-oh
Paper I want is in Доклады Академии Наук СССР
 
@Secret the newly discovered object, whatever it is, is 1500 light years away from the galaxy core. We're going to be waiting a long time for that to merge with the central black hole.
 
Do we have any soviets on the chat
In 4-dimensional topology, a branch of mathematics, Rokhlin's theorem states that if a smooth, compact 4-manifold M has a spin structure (or, equivalently, the second Stiefel–Whitney class w2(M) vanishes), then the signature of its intersection form, a quadratic form on the second cohomology group H2(M), is divisible by 16. The theorem is named for Vladimir Rokhlin, who proved it in 1952. == Examples == The intersection form on M Q M : H 2 ...
nice
 
@JohnRennie ah yes, i must have misread some numbers and get a small separation
 
12:04 PM
But, suppose this experiment really get the result as it intended, what will become of relativity. The moment you can show that human minds can violate the violation of bell test, then causality becomes a really complicated business where you have to take account of all the minds scattered through the globe for each decision?
 
12:25 PM
Guys, I don't understand why they plotted $\phi(k)$ and therefore concluded that the spread in momentum is large? I know that $p=\hbar k$, but I don't see how $p$ and $\phi(k)$ are related. In the case of the plot of $\Psi(x,0)$, I can see that if we were to calculate $\sigma_x$, we would get a small value, because the spread is small. However, if we were to calculate $\sqrt{\langle\Delta p\rangle}$, I don't see how we can use $\phi(k)$ directly?
Oh, maybe I have an idea: a wave packet is a superposition of waves whose amplitude depend of $\phi$. Hence, if the spread in $\phi$ is small, we have a wave packet that consists of a small range of waves, whose momentum doesn't differ a lot. So the overal spread in momentum is much smaller.
 
rob
12:42 PM
@ShaVuklia Isn't the momentum proportional to the wavevector, $p = \hbar k$?
 
@rob yes it is
but that alone doesn't explain why we plot $\phi(k)$, does it?
 
rob
@ShaVuklia So the second plot shows that all $k$ are equally likely
 
oh, so $\phi(k)$ or $\vert\phi^2(k)\vert$ is sort of a probability density?
 
rob
Exactly: $|\phi(k)|^2$ is a probability density in momentum space, just like $|\phi(x)|^2$ is a probability density in position space.
 
ah I did not know, thanks @rob
 
rob
12:50 PM
@ShaVuklia Glad to help
 
Suppose I give the hamitonian of a molecule to a physicist to solve (and suppose for the sake of argument, that the solution (numerical or not) is actually found), what physical quantities will he/she/it interested in in the solution of that hamiltonian?
 
1:15 PM
G' afternoon
 
 
1 hour later…
2:43 PM
@vzn Remember to share the AMA post with the CS people
 
"A supermanifold $X$ of dimension $p|q$ is a ringed space $(|X|,O_X)$"
Save me
 
3:11 PM
@JohnRennie Man, this laptop with 16GB of ram is a beast
 
@BernardoMeurer Cool :-)
I've been using my new (old) Precision m6700 in anger for the first time now I'm at my Mum's and I'm very pleased with it as well.
It's the same CPU as your Latitude and also 16GB RAM. Proprietary malware though :-)
 
@JohnRennie The only problem with 17" laptops is they're a bitch to carry around
 
@BernardoMeurer Damn yes! This thing is built like a tank!
I had to buy a backpack to carry the thing in :-)
 
To be fair, my E6530 is also a damn Panzer. It's literally indestructible
 
@BernardoMeurer It's worth it though :)
 
3:17 PM
Guys, if we have a symmetric potential about $x=0$, then why is $\langle x\rangle=\langle p\rangle=0$? I would think we should be looking at how $\psi$ looks instead of $V$?
 
@Mithrandir24601 Meh, my 15" screen is good enough. I do wish I had another monitor though
 
@ShaVuklia the symmetry means $\psi$ has to be either symmetric or antisymmetric. Either way the expectation value is going to come out zero.
 
@John is it because the higher the potential, the less likely we will find our particle there?
 
@BernardoMeurer I don't have space for another monitor :/ Nor would I be able to carry it anywhere very easily :P
 
@ShaVuklia Suppose $\psi$ is symmetric, then $x\psi$ is antisymmetric so $\psi^*\,x\,\psi$ is antisymmetric.
And when we integrate an antisymmetric function we get zero because the values either side of the origin cancel out.
 
3:21 PM
@Mithrandir24601 Well, I mean mostly for home use. I don't spend enough time outside my house to need a second screen on-the-go
 
I understand what happens after we've concluded that $\psi$ is symmetric @John but I don't see why it had to be symmetric in the first place. is it because the higher the potential, the less likely we can find the particle?
 
@BernardoMeurer Fair enough - I don't use it much outside/bring it with me anywhere that much either, but then moving house every year means that I'd rather have the bigger laptop screen than a second monitor
 
@ShaVuklia If the potential is symmetric we're saying $x$ and $-x$ are physically indistinguishable.
And the symmetry of the wavefunction has to reflect this.
 
oh right of course
that makes sense
thanks! @john
 
@ShaVuklia You are using 'john' with reckless abandonment...hence you have summoned another John...
@Mithrandir24601 Yo how's it going?
 
3:25 PM
@BernardoMeurer the Precision has the same 1080p resolution, but for my (aging!) eyes 1080p on a 15" screen is just a bit too small. The 17" screen is that bit easier to read.
 
oh haha oops :P @JohnDoe sorry
 
@JohnDoe Pretty much same as yesterday - a bit of revision for Wednesday and a bit of tidying/cleaning to do...
 
@JohnRennie I've been dying to see a 4K screen. ONE DAY
 
@Mithrandir24601 For probability density function $\rho$ in QM are $|\alpha^{(i)} \rangle$ the eigenstates of $\rho := \sum_{i} w_i | \alpha^{(i)} \rangle \langle \alpha^{(i)}|$ which diagonalize it?
@ShaVuklia No prob :)
 
@BernardoMeurer The main reason I wanted the Precision is the keyboard is so nice. The gen 3 i7 Latitudes and Precisions use a proper keyboard not a chiclet keyboard, and it's much nicer for typing on.
@BernardoMeurer the ultra high res screens use a higher dpi so you don't get any more info on the screen, it just looks nicer. Personally I don't see that as a huge advantage.
 
3:28 PM
@JohnRennie My favorite keyboard ever is the Thinkpad one, GOD that keyboard is nice
The old ones, not the new ones
 
@JohnDoe They might be - you can write/define it so that they are the eigenstates, but not necessarily (I'm not sure if that's clear or not...)
 
@JohnRennie Sure, you don't get more real-estate on the screen BUT I can watch my movies better
 
Meh. Watching films on a laptop isn't that great anyway compared to a big TV with the sound going through your hifi.
 
@Mithrandir24601 Okay thanks
 
@BernardoMeurer :D :P
 
3:36 PM
@JohnRennie I do not own a television :P
I do not own anything with a screen apart from my laptop and my phone
 
@BernardoMeurer I guess it would be silly to buy a TV if you're going to be leaving Portugal at the end of the year. The cost of shipping it would be ridiculous.
 
@JohnRennie Yep, I also do not have space in my room for a TV :P
 
vzn
4:04 PM
1
Q: CS angle AMA "ask me anything" jun13 Bernardo Meurer

vznearlier this year Michael Wehar proposed a CS AMA "ask me anything" session that had strong support but which has not gone further/ advanced so far beyond conceptual stage. this is to announce not exactly that event but one related. on jun13th Bernardo Meurer will host the Physics AMA. he has str...

 
@DanielSank you didn't add upcoming event of bernanado in this physics.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7783/…
 
vzn
@BernardoMeurer just saw a demo clip of grand turismo ps4 4k at best buy, think it was. breathtaking! whats this about leaving portugal? only for the summer?
 
4:37 PM
> Even if this experiment does not lead to a violation of quantum theory
it
shows how we can talk scientifically about mind-matter dualism. There
ex-
ists a class of scientifically testable theories invoking duality that are
open to
falsification.
 
@ACuriousMind I need a superman
A man who knows about supersymmetry
 
@Slereah What ails you?
 
He needs to have God killed
 
At least it's a Nietzsche and not a Hitler reference. Our niveau is improving :P
 
4:45 PM
@ACuriousMind 1) does the $\mathcal N$ in SUSY refers to the dimension of the Grassmann numbers $\Bbb R_ m$ in $\Bbb R^n_c \times \Bbb R_a^m$
2) is the tangent plane of the supermanifold supposed to be some kind of spinor + vector thing?
3) what is the canonical map between spin manifolds and supermanifodls
 
@ACuriousMind You better have liked my AMA meta post thrice
 
4) also what's the link between $OSp$ and the super Lorentz group
$OSp$ rotates the (super)frames which is weird because that's usually the role of the Lorentz group
 
@Slereah 1. Yes, it denotes their representation as spinors, and therefore also their dimensionality. Note that you can have things like $\mathcal{N} = (2,0)$ and $\mathcal{N}=(1,1)$ in dimensions where you have Weyl spinors, which would have the same number of supercharges but a different structure. 2. Yeah. 3. No idea what that is. 4. It appears...somehow, but I'm not really familiar with it.
 
So I'm guessing that $\mathcal N = 0$ is just ordinary GR
Well ordinary field theory, even
What is the structure of the tangent space, exactly?
 
@Slereah Yes, $\mathcal{N}=0$ would be a strange way of saying "no superthings here" :P
 
4:49 PM
I'm guessing that it is as well $\Bbb R^n_c \times \Bbb R^{\mathcal N}_a$
But how do you extract spinors from that?
Also what changes does the value of $\mathcal N$ do here?
I know that there is some mysterious link between grassman numbers and spinors, but I'm never too sure what that is
I guess it relates to Clifford algebras
 
$\mathcal{N}=1$ is not the "dimension" of the Graßmann part.
$\mathcal{N}=1$ means "minimal amount of supersymmetry", which means your supercharges assemble into the lowest-dimensional possible spinor, often a Majorana spinor.
 
Is there a link between the two?
 
Sure - but it depends on the dimension of the bosonic manifold.
 
Is "the bosonic manifold" just a fancy term for "the spacetime"
 
4:56 PM
Makes sense I guess
Would that be 2D for $\mathcal N = 1$ in 4D?
Since majorana spinors are 2D vectors
 
Alright
How does the tangent space "split", exactly?
You've got a vector in $\Bbb R^n_c \times \Bbb R^2_a$
It represents both a vector and spinor, if I understand
Is it just that the first half is the vector component and the second half the spinor component?
 
I'm not sure I understand the question - the tangent space is spanned by derivations as susual
 
But a SUPERVECTOR FIELD represents both a spinor and a vector field, right?
 
uhhhh
I think a "supervector field" is just a field $f^i(x,\theta)\partial_i$ where $\partial_i$ runs over both bosonic and fermionic indices.
And yeah, I guess the fermionic part still transforms as a spinor.
But generally, I'd avoid wading into the murky waters of supergeometry unless you really need to :P
 
5:08 PM
I guess I should find this fabled canonical correspondance between spin manifolds and supermanifolds
It might help
Also does that mean that for very high $\mathcal N$ the correspondance is not the same?
Like you might get vector fields associated with Rarita fields
 
I have no idea which correspondence you mean
 
You know
$Q \Phi = \Psi$
or somesuch
 
I know not what that has to do with spin manifolds
Are you trying to ask what the supermultiplets are? :P
 
Could be!
Also according to some paper, there is a correspondance between spin manifolds and supermanifolds, which I guess is maybe something like a mapping between supervector fields and vector fields + spinor fields, mb?
 
So, please state a bit more clearly what you want to know and maybe I can tell you
@Slereah Yeah, I've never heard of such a correspondence. Doesn't mean it isn't there, but it's at least not "well-known" in the SUGRA papers I'm reading
 
5:21 PM
I'm guessing that most people don't even use supermanifolds
I haven't seen a lot of them before looking for them specifically
 
You can get by without using them.
 
found the theorem
"For any $p \in M_0$, there is a canonical isomorphism of $\mathbb Z_2$-graded vector spaces $\iota_p : T_p M_0 + S^*_p \xrightarrow{\sim} T_p M$"
With $M_0$ a spin manifold and $M$ a supermanifold
 
Ah, yeah, that's what I said above - the supervector fields are spanned by $\partial_i$ for both bosonic and fermionic coordinates, and the bosonic part is of course $T_p M_0$, and the fermionic part transforms pretty much by definition in the spinor representation.
 
And $S$ the spinor bundle
 
Note that that is not a correspondence "between spin manifolds and supermanifolds". To me it just says that the tangent space of a supermanifold is the direct sum of the bosonic and fermionic pieces.
(Under "correspondence" I initially thought you were asking for some sort of bijection between spin manifolds and supermanifolds)
 
5:34 PM
Well I'm guessing no for that
You still need some "structure" for the supersymmetry
Some supergauge bundle, I dunno
I just wanted to read about string theory ;w;
But there isn't a lot of non SUSY string theory left
So i must learn the ways of SUSY
I'm looking in DeWitt's book for the exact meaning of $\mathcal N$ and in a mocking twist there is literally no N in the index
He's got a whole chapter on groups, though
let's give it a look
 
5:56 PM
@TheDarkSide I use html superscript mark up (<sup>1</sup>) to indicate the footnotes and set the notes off from the text with a horizontal rule (---). Numbering and ordering are manual.
Other people do different things.
I see that John R. uses MathJax to get the superscript, but I got started on Stack Overflow where there is no MathJax, so I got into the habit of plain html.
Note that there are several html tags that are accepted and processed that do not have markdown equivalents. You can also use strikeouts, for instance (but not in chat, sigh).
 
6:19 PM
@ACuriousMind can the supermanifold be non-trivial?
Like what are the restrictions on the topology of the supermanifold
 
6:42 PM
Sounds like a poker game with "superman."
;-)
 
Basically everything about supersymmetry is usual physics with "super" in front
super vector spaces, super vector fields, supermanifolds, super lie algebras
 
@Slereah Look up Batchelor's theorem
If you were asking if the fermionic part can be "non-trivial", then no, not really, it's always sort of a vector bundle over the bosonic part.
 
@dmckee Thanks (for method number 2). :)
Also, on an unrelated note:
(Sorry for the spam comment, but really ...) Haha hahaha ... — The Dark Side 10 hours ago
^ To whomsoever it may concern,
I'm deleting this comment now.
Apparently, 0celot got banned and I wasn't aware of the entire development ...
 
So, inadvertently, this comment may appear crude/rude/insensitive to people.
Apologies.
 
@ACuriousMind makes sense
would be weird otherwise
I guess that's partly why you don't really need supermanifolds
 
@TheDarkSide accepted
 
?
Wat?
 
the apology is accepted
 
7:01 PM
Are you 0celot in disguise?
 
@ACuriousMind With regard to density operators: If we express our states by say $$| \psi_m \rangle = \sum_{j}c_{jm}|j \rangle$$ where $\{ j \}_j$ are our basis states, if we have a completely mixed state then as I understand this implies that each $| \psi_m \rangle$ is equally likely, but am I correct in stating that this does not necessarily imply that each $|j \rangle$ is equally likely?
My reasoning is that we have two types of probability at work here, the quantum-mechanical probability coefficients $c_{jm}$ and the probability $w_m$ from the probabillity density function $\rho = \sum_{m}w_m |\psi_m \rangle \langle \psi_m|$, hence for a completely mixed state we have that $w_m$ is equal for all $m$ but this does not imply that $c_{jm}$ is equal for all $m$. What do you think?
 
7:29 PM
o/
 
7:51 PM
@JohnDoe No, you are not correct. A completely mixed state is simply $\frac{1}{N}\mathbf{1}_N$, where $N$ is the dimension of your space. A multiple of the identity is a multiple of the identity in every basis, so indeed saying that all $\psi_m$ are equally likely is equivalent to saying all $j$ are equally likely (if the $\psi_m$ form a basis).
 
8:08 PM
@ACuriousMind
Oh yeah I see. Would this be an example $\rho = (1/2)|+ \rangle \langle + | + (1/2)|- \rangle \langle - |$?
 
Yes, that is a completely mixed state.
 
@ACuriousMind Okay thanks. One thing, would you agree that since the density operator is hermitian that it can be written as a linear combintation of eigenstates and eigenvalues $$\rho = \sum_j \lambda_j | \lambda_j \rangle \langle \lambda_j |$$ where $\lambda_j$ are the eigenvalues. Hence this again gives the probability $\lambda_j$ of finding the system $| \psi \rangle$ in state $|\lambda_j \rangle$?
 
@JohnDoe Yes. As I said, I would pretty much define a "density operator" to be of that form, with that specific interpretation of the $\lambda_j$.
What is your definition of "density operator" that this is not immediate?
Are you just defining it by a list of its properties, like unit trace, Hermiticity, non-negative eigenvalues?
 
@ACuriousMind My definition is that $\rho := \sum_{i}w_{i} | \alpha^{(i)} \rangle \langle \alpha^{(i)}|$. But $w_i$ are not necessarily eigenvalues of $\rho$ or that $| \alpha^{(i)} \rangle$ are eigenstates of $\rho$.
 
@JohnDoe ...that they are follows immediately from that definition if the $\lvert \alpha^{(i)}\rangle$ are orthogonal to each other.
 
8:22 PM
@ACuriousMind Yeah I know but why would that be guarenteed. In fact in Sakurai it states that "need not be orthogonal". This is the definition I am using. From Sakurai.
@ACuriousMind He doesn't mention writing it in the eigenvalue eigenstate form at all.
@ACuriousMind He mentions the eigenvalues and eigenstates but the equation of the density operator in the form as you mentioned never appears.
 
Wait a moment, what are the $w_i$ in your definition, if not probabilities?
@JohnDoe Which form? I'm still a little bit confused what exactly your issue is.
 
@ACuriousMind They are probabilities but not eigenvalues of $\rho$.
 
Yeah, sure, if your states are not orthogonal they won't be
 
@ACuriousMind Yes I understand. I have no issue right at the moment :) Are you going offline now?
 
@JohnDoe I'll be around for a while
 
8:32 PM
hey guys a quick question basically
 
@ACuriousMind So you can start with a state $\rho = \sum w_i | \psi^{(i)} \rangle \langle \psi^{(i)}|$ and then rewrite $\rho$ in an eigenstate eigenvalue form $\rho = \sum \lambda_j | \lambda_j \rangle \langle \lambda_j |$...and then you know the probabilities of the system for the eigenstates $| \lambda_j \rangle$ as well as $| \psi^{(i)} \rangle$. That seems like you are getting something for nothing...
 
about the heat eq. it's linear right? its operators are linear. so a sum of 2 solutions should be a solution to the eq. right? Well I'm unable to show this holds for the function T(x,t) = A exp(-x/d1) *cos(omega1 *t -x/d1 -phi1) + B exp(-x/d2) *cos(omega2 *t -x/d2 -phi2) while each term do satisfy kappa d^2T/dt^2 = dT/dt
i even used Maxima CAS to check up my math and it tells me this sum doesn't satisfy the heat eq while each term does
so i really dont know what's going on
 
@JohnDoe Why would you get "something for nothing"? Both sets of probabilities encode the same statistical information - the same density matrix.
 
@ACuriousMind I was discovering the magic of physics there for a second, and you are saying it's an illusion...But yeah I see what you are saying.
 
@no_choice99 Without you being more explicit about what the problem is, I'd wager you're making some sort of computational mistake. The heat equation is indeed homogeneous and linear when written as $D f = 0$ for $D = \partial_t - \kappa\partial_x^2$. The principle of superposition can't fail.
 
8:46 PM
thanks @ACuriousMind that's reassuring. I really tried with both hands and Maxima
 
@ACuriousMind Could you maybe give me a hint of how to show that $\langle \psi| \rho | \psi \rangle = Tr[| \psi \rangle \langle \psi| \rho]$...
 
each term indeed do satisfy the heat eq. but not their sum... i will retry but i have little hope
@ACuriousMind the problem doesnt matter much. i've basically seen that function in a book to describe the temperature of something, and i had a doubt on whether it would satisfy the heat eq. so i tried to show it by hand, failed. tried with maxima, failed again
it turns out it was because i couldn't factor /cancel some contants because omega2 and omega1 differ and other things like that
 

« first day (2398 days earlier)      last day (2521 days later) »