Recent content by Greger

For me physics coursework was harder then most mathematics homework (with the exception of real and functional analysis). My approach was to generally avoid working in groups unless I had absolutely no idea about what the question was asking, I found I worked better at home on my own. I still...

Thanks for your reply, I am required to determine the band width using the method I described in my first post. The second article you posted does show similar results to what I have obtained, however I am asking how, from the information I currently have, can I calculate λ2. (Recall the...

He must mean the order in which his university offers them (in terms of prerequisites and semesters). eumyang nailed it.

Hi, I recently did a experiment in which I measured the intensity of light out of a optical filter at different angles of incidence. The optical filter was designed such that only light of wavelength 405 nm is transmitted. The wavelength of incident light (the laser I used) was 402 nm. My...

hey guys, i have been trying to derive an expression for the total angular momentum zero state from the addition of two angular momenta using schwinger's model of angular momentum. i.e. the state \left| {{j}_{1}},{{m}_{1}} \right\rangle \otimes \left| {{j}_{2}},{{m}_{2}} \right\rangle...

Yea it's an actual problem, haha I see what you mean, it looks like instructions. The question asks to actually preform the integration given, And in the integral you have u_t(x,y,0) and the question says substitute: u_t(x,y,0) = w_t(x,0) = ψ(x) so now the integral becomes ∫∫ ψ(x)/stuff...

Thanks for replying, Yea u_t(x,y,0) = w_t(x,0) = ψ(x), But what I mean is there is no explicate form of ψ(x), for example ψ(x) = x, ψ(x) = cos(x), its juts left arbitrarily as ψ(x). What would ∫ψ(x)dxdy be if there is no explicate form for ψ(x)?

http://imageshack.us/a/img824/1121/asdasdaw.png I am having trouble completely understanding what the question wants. I know it is quite clear but the part I am having trouble is the following. It says 'pretend' w(x,t) is a solution to the 2D equation, just independent of y, then to...

Does that look ok? That shows that x_n is Cauchy, since you have ||x_n - x_k|| < 3e/4 < e for n,k > N = max(N_n, N_K)

Oh so using the trick where you add 0, |x_n|=|x_n - x_k + x_k|≤ |x_n - x_k|+|x_k| Then for x_k in c_0, For ε>0 there is an N > 0 such that for all n>N, |x_k| <ε/4 So |x_n - x_k|+|x_k| < |x_n - x_k|+ε/4 Then |x_n - x_k| will definitely be smaller then ε so |x_n - x_k|+ε/4...

Maybe this might help, Remember you can write the log as, ln((4 - x)/(3x + 8)) = ln(4 - x) - ln(3x + 8) Now when you take the derivative you can take it of each log separately so it will be a little easier to see. For example, when taking the derivative of one, if it were...

http://imageshack.us/a/img141/4963/92113198.jpg hey, I'm having some trouble with this question, For part a) I know that in order for c_0 to be closed every sequence in c_0 must converge to a limit in c_0 but I am having trouble actually showing that formally with the use of the norm...

Wouldnt that N be the same N required for (a_n,b_n) to converge?

Sorry I editing my post a bit to make it make more sense haha, If the N are different then for the a case i'll write it as N_a, then you need N = max(N_a, N_b) right?

For the cartesian product, For some ε>0 there exists an N such that |(a_n,b_n) - (a,b)|<ε whenever n>N |(a_n-a,b_n-b)| = |a_n-a|_A + |b_n-b|_B For individual spaces For some ε>0 there exists an N such that |a_n - a|_A<ε/2 whenever n>N (same definition for b_n) and if you add them together...