Recent content by dracobook

yes. But Griffiths derives Pauli exclusion principle by showing that when the positional wave functions are antisymmetric with exchange, then the wave function cancels when the particle states are the same.

Hi all, I want to make sure I have the right understanding of the symmetrization requirement...in particular what is discussed in section 5.1 in Griffiths' Introduction to Quantum Mechanics 2nd edition. When we have a two-electron state, the wave function (described by the product both its...

Homework Statement A point particle moves in space under the influence of a force derivable from a generalized potential of the form U(r, v) = V (r) + \sigma \cdot L where r is the radius vector from a fixed point, L is the angular momentum about that point, and \sigma is a fixed vector...

Hi matumich, sorry I'm not sure if I can help but if you could so kindly explain to me where you got the relavant equation for |a_n|^2 and for psi(x,t) I would greatly appreciate it. Also, could you explain to me why the last line is equal to |integral 1*1 dx|^2?

fair enough thanks.

Hi. Sorry I know this thread has already been answered. Just one quick question: How do you know that the density of the drop remains constant?

Hi, I'm not sure if this is the right place for this...if it isn't if I could be redirected/if a moderator could move my post to the right place I would greatly appreciate it. In any case, I am trying to understand fractal dimensions. I read through wikipedia's description and I believe I...

I would like to thank both of you for clarifying this up for me.

Ah I see thank you. Would it be safe to assume that the force cannot be expressed as a potential in this case? and is therefore not conservative?

Thanks for the derivation. However I think I am mostly confused about whether the Euler-Lagrange holds in this problem, that is whether the LHS of your last equation with L in place of T is equal to Q or 0, and if it is Q why? If it is Q (which I have been led to believe by other people) I...

nope. No other information is given .

Ah I see what you are saying. Also what I mean is that my 4th and 6th equations are not consistent (I believe). The 4th assume F = dp/dt , but I don't think the 6th does? I interpret 6 as defining the LHS of 4th as force.

Thanks for pointing on the mistakes and your response! My Lagrangian is actually not one and is equal to T if you plug everything in and make proper substitutions

Thanks for the replies and explanations. yes I meant to put total derivative for the first equation but I do not believe I made any errors to equation 4. Ken, or anyone else, would you mind explaining what you meant by two? If I changed \frac{dv}{dt} to \ddot x would this change the error...

Correct me if I am wrong but as far as I know, force is generally defined in three ways ways: 1) F = \frac{d p}{d t} 2) F = m\dot v 3) F = ma This is all well in good usually...until the case arises when mass is variable. Then two contradictory cases arise: If we take definition 1...we...