RayPalmer

Thank you sir, I guess I'll return to you after I have a bit of understanding ( a couple of months later I guess ). If I have doubts, I can text you ?

I've heard Dr. Susskind's lectures are excellent

Okay sir, maybe I could accompany it with some lecture series ?

yeah, I suppose

I'd say quite a lot. I'd have to brush up on my special relativity with respect to electrodynamics a little but. But apart from that, I think I'd done quite a bit of it.

yeah, I want to do something, that won't essentially be a part of my syllabus. Just get some exposure in research kind of work

yeah something like that. Although it would be very helpful if I can somehow manage to find a guide like an unofficial summer school, but realistically speaking I don't think anyone would have the time for that.

I've also done quite a bit of statistical mechanics ( semiclassical ), not yet done the density matrix part yet.

yes, sir, and such a guide is missing where I'm from. We've got some highly qualified teachers and so on, but summer schools and undergraduate research are sadly not encouraged here.

that and a bit of varying speed of light cosmology and so on. But these are highly technical topics

In fact, Sir I'm highly interested in theories involving the fate of the universe, like Penrose's conformal cosmology, inflation, and so on.

As you said, I was extremely interested in General relativity, but it is one of those topics that would be almost impossible for me to do, without a proper guide

Hello sir, I hope you don't mind that I added you to this private conversation

Quantum mechanics, mathematical physics ( any thing that involves some heavy math ), and astronomy although I've not taken any classes on the latter yet.

Hey people, I'm in my 3rd year of undergrad, and I'm going through a small vacation. I was hoping someone could enlighten me about some possible undergrad research topics, since summer schools didn't start yet in my country, and I don't know when I'll be able to apply for it. I was hoping to do some work, and get a bit of research experience or something. Any help would be highly appreciated

What's the difference between the calorimetry equation Q=mc dT, and the heat equation T_{t}=kT_{xx} ? If we know, the final temperature using the calorimetry equation, what exactly does the heat differential equation tell us ?

yes sir, thank you so much

so in a sense, this question is somewhat wrong, isn't it ? in the sense that it is not defined properly ?

however, there is a lot of people claiming that it should be positive instead.

thank you, doing that the answer is coming out to be -1 mJ

( sorry work done is q E.dl )

however, some people argue that the work done should be positive, as it is some external agent that does the work. However, my idea was that if I put a negative charge in an electric field, it would move in the direction opposite to the field. The work would be done by the field itself, and the potential energy would increase. There is no external force involved

What I did was simply integrate E.dl which is the work done by the field, and this came to be negative

my problem here is, they didn't mention who is doing the work here

wait, let me show you the question

I was given an electric field in polar coordinates, and it was said that a negative charge was put into this field.

Hello sir, sorry to bother you again

Thank you so much, again sir, you have been a life saver :D

as in, if I connect the bodies, and draw a graph of temperatures, it will give me how this graph changes , and what it looks like at a certain time, provided we know how it looked like in the beginning

the heat equation tells the temperature of any body at any point on the body, at any time

Ah so, the calorimetry equation just tells me the final average temperature between two or more bodies with different average temperatures

But is the calorimetry equation useful in this case, when we have a single body ?

okay, and in case of suppose a single rod, heated at one end for a while, such that the two ends are at different initial temperatures, I think I can use the heat equation to get the temperature profile at any instant, and also the final temperature.

Using the heat equation, I guess we are finding the temperature distribution at each point in time, because, this final temperature is not reached instantaneously. However, using the heat diffusion equation, at time tending to infinity, will I obtain the exact same final temperature as I did, using the calorimetry equation ?

As in, if I have two rods of the same type at two different temperatures, but same mass and heat capacity , and I bring them in contact at the two ends, using the calorimetry equation, I can figure out the final temperature, which would just be the average of the initial temperatures in this case.

What's the difference between the calorimetry equation Q=mc dT, and the heat equation T_{t}=kT_{xx} ? If we know, the final temperature using the calorimetry equation, what exactly does the heat differential equation tell us ?

Hello sir, sorry to bother you again, but I had another question in case you're not busy

thank you so much

So, the tension in the first one must be more

ah, thank you so much, I was trying to get this

however, can I truly claim that the overall freqency is equal in both strings, since the same fork excites them.

if I claim that the overall frequency is equal, then the first string has 4 times more tension.

the first string is vibrating at fundamental, and second one is vibrating at first overtone

is the tension in the first string more, or is it more in the second one

as in

yes, but the confusion is regarding which string

yes, I was supposed to find that point on the wire, and I did it using my method

is that line of reasoning correct ?

Now I've argued that the same tuning fork excites both wires so f_1 = f_2, and thus T_1>T_2