Recent content by Smalde

Thank you very much for your responses. I had certainly not thought about it that way. I guess if one does not know in detail about experimental methods it might be very difficult for one to discuss the way theory becomes experiment. I will also look at the University in Dresden. :) Still, does...

Dear All, I am sorry if you consider this question to be repetitive or too general but I have been unable to find sufficient answers on the web and thus I want to see what I can win from asking you guys. First my situation: I finished my Physics' Bachelor in the LMU Munich with good grades...

May I ask what the name of said book is? It is true that one can do quantum mechanics to some extent without having seen either the Lagrangian nor the Hamiltonian formulation of quantum mechanics: engineers doing introductory courses on nanotechnology do it, but it does require some acceptance...

Yes, that's what took me so long to understand. Those cs have to work for all possible cases where a equals b. In other words, in this case, there can only be one such c. THANKS!

Ok, wait. I think I get it now: there can exist more than one, but all ought to fulfill the statement in every one case. Is it so?

Well 2 and 3. That's what I do not understand. I was told that the "there exists" symbol means that there exists at least one of something.

This is no homework for me. I am working as a teaching assistant in a lecture about logic and discrete structures for Informatics students. This should be a piece of cake, but I am not exactly sure of the logic behind. 1. Homework Statement Translate into words ∃c . ∀a ∈ A . ∀b ∈ B . ¬(a =...

Then please show us what you have already done.

Because of this thread, obviously :P

Well, the definition of relative mass is only that: a definition. People used to set ##m = \gamma m_0## and then ##E = mc²##, but more often then not one uses ##E = m_0 \gamma c²## Both relativistic force and relativistic acceleration have a factor gamma in them, and so the ratio of force to...

What is the distance between the crystal and the the foil? This is, what is D?

Making my point about the minuteness of the corrections more thorough: ##p_{rel} = \sqrt{ \frac{1}{c²}(T + mc²)² - m²c² } = \sqrt{T²/c²+2Tm+m²c²-m²c²} = \sqrt{T²/c²+2Tm} = \sqrt{T}\sqrt{T/c²+2m}## ##p_{non-rel} = \sqrt{2Tm} = \sqrt{T}\sqrt{2m}## Thus ##\frac{p_{rel}}{p_{non-rel}} = \sqrt{...

Oh, right, reviewing my notes something did clearly go wrong in the solving for ##|\vec{p}_\nu|## step... I wasn't careful enough and crossed a beryllium term on the left hand and a lithium term on the right as if they were the same. I did not check the result because it was the same result I...

This result is correct, because 1keV is non-relativistic for electrons, since electron rest mass is around 500keV. On the other hand one can solve this exercise using the equation OP wanted to use: E² = m²c⁴ + p²c² He said the energy (meaning the kinetic energy) of the electron is one keV...

So... a new problem arises when trying to calculate the momentum of the neutrino. Assuming negligible momentum of both the electron and the beryllium and negligible neutrino mass: P_e = (m_e c,\vec{0}) P_{⁷Be} = (m_{⁷Be} c,\vec{0}) P_{⁷Li} = (E/c,\vec{p}_{⁷Li}) P_{\nu} =...