You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Phase of a probability
- Thread starter Vkothii
- Start date
If you can construct the action-angle coordinates, why don't you? Hell, anyone can google "Hamiltonian mechanics" and reproduce some of the findings!
As I said, there's nothing wrong with not knowing about Hamiltonian dynamics. It's another thing to pretend you know about them!
As I said, there's nothing wrong with not knowing about Hamiltonian dynamics. It's another thing to pretend you know about them!
You ignorant person.
I have no intention of googling anything. I was going to recite the classes i had when i did cover such a subject.
You know, you are too confident for your own boots. What's worse, is that YOU ARE NOT a physicist... but being a mathematician you do have an upper hand in being able to look at an equation and work it like a second language.
But i bet you don't know the first thing about freedom expressions like
$$T^{\alpha}=de^{\alpha}+w^{\alpha}_{\beta}.e^{\beta}$$
or perhaps how to understand a spatial composition
$$\frac{d^{2}x^{\mu}}{d \tau^{2}}= \frac{1}{2} \eta^{mu}^{\lambda}\partial_{ \lambda}h_{00} \frac{dt}{d \tau}^{2}$$
Or maybe not?
But here is where this pathetic arguement has gone, and i feel displacing from it very fast.
I have no intention of googling anything. I was going to recite the classes i had when i did cover such a subject.
You know, you are too confident for your own boots. What's worse, is that YOU ARE NOT a physicist... but being a mathematician you do have an upper hand in being able to look at an equation and work it like a second language.
But i bet you don't know the first thing about freedom expressions like
$$T^{\alpha}=de^{\alpha}+w^{\alpha}_{\beta}.e^{\beta}$$
or perhaps how to understand a spatial composition
$$\frac{d^{2}x^{\mu}}{d \tau^{2}}= \frac{1}{2} \eta^{mu}^{\lambda}\partial_{ \lambda}h_{00} \frac{dt}{d \tau}^{2}$$
Or maybe not?
But here is where this pathetic arguement has gone, and i feel displacing from it very fast.
Last edited:
It's now completely apparent that you don't know anything about Hamiltonian dynamics (which is basic undergrad physics). Actually, I'd be willing to bet you don't understand any undergrad physics. I think it's usually the case that those who know least feel that they can get away with lying the most.
I see things are going well...
This is not some attempt to either demonstrate a woeful lack of math-ability, or give anyone their opening to show everyone else how big their head can get, rather an attempt to explore a certain experiment - the rotation of electron phase in a curl-free region of space - from some other angle.
Anyways, there's a mass action term derived in the Schwarzchild metric, or "the result of the gravitational field acting on the wave function of the free electron."
I just thought I would see if there was any interest. It's about something called "the propagator" - a path integral.
I don't know enough, about a lot of somewhat tricky mathematical ideas. I tell myself nonetheless, I don't need to learn about all of them, or even all about any of them.
Then again, I think I'm dealing with people who might be unable to abstract the idea that at some point, reality replaces math, you get information from reality, from real atoms, not a math formula.
This is not some attempt to either demonstrate a woeful lack of math-ability, or give anyone their opening to show everyone else how big their head can get, rather an attempt to explore a certain experiment - the rotation of electron phase in a curl-free region of space - from some other angle.
Anyways, there's a mass action term derived in the Schwarzchild metric, or "the result of the gravitational field acting on the wave function of the free electron."
I just thought I would see if there was any interest. It's about something called "the propagator" - a path integral.
I don't know enough, about a lot of somewhat tricky mathematical ideas. I tell myself nonetheless, I don't need to learn about all of them, or even all about any of them.
Then again, I think I'm dealing with people who might be unable to abstract the idea that at some point, reality replaces math, you get information from reality, from real atoms, not a math formula.
Last edited:
It's now completely apparent that you don't know anything about Hamiltonian dynamics (which is basic undergrad physics). Actually, I'd be willing to bet you don't understand any undergrad physics. I think it's usually the case that those who know least feel that they can get away with lying the most.
Go suck a lemon.
I honestly don't care whether you believe me or not. It doesn't effect me, or the people i work with, whether you believe me or not. And i am 100% positive it doesn't affect my credibility with anyone here, if you believe i am not a physicist or not.
Deal?
Yes Vkothii..
..My original discontempt was that symbols are not explained. It's nothing against you.
But guest has turned this into a flame fest.
I actually take 50% Of the blame however, because if i had read your post instead of JUST the equations, i would have seen you where talking about integrals of action.
But as i said, that's not the point, and CERTAINLY not the one Guest is trying to ellaborate on.
..My original discontempt was that symbols are not explained. It's nothing against you.
But guest has turned this into a flame fest.
I actually take 50% Of the blame however, because if i had read your post instead of JUST the equations, i would have seen you where talking about integrals of action.
But as i said, that's not the point, and CERTAINLY not the one Guest is trying to ellaborate on.
And (plus sorry for making three posts in a row), that i offered to give up what i know on Hamiltonians, dispite admitting it has been a while working on them. But then Guest blamed me for going to google it up.
I am interested in exactly what he/she thought i was going to google up... wiki perhaps..
..hahaha... get a life.
I am interested in exactly what he/she thought i was going to google up... wiki perhaps..
..hahaha... get a life.
You actually claim you're a professional physicist?!? Wow.I honestly don't care whether you believe me or not. It doesn't effect me, or the people i work with, whether you believe me or not. And i am 100% positive it doesn't affect my credibility with anyone here, if you believe i am not a physicist or not.
How are you funded, may I ask?
The governement. And my own savings... about 20,000 pounds of it.
The "governement"? What funding body is that? I guess you acquired the funding by producing a past record of high-level publications?The governement. And my own savings... about 20,000 pounds of it.