Recent content by IronHamster

Ah, I understand perfectly. Thanks Aleph!

I recently bought this resistor: http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=12573233 I want to hook it up to about 50V DC, but I want to know if this would be harmful to the resistor. According to the description it can handle up to 800V, but its power rating is only 25W. This...

I have been trying to find an analytic solution to the time-dependent Schrödinger Equation. I plan to make a movie of the probability function as it changes over time, but I can't seem to find any analytic solution for the wave function. Is it possible to solve the time-dependent Schrödinger...

Oh ok that makes sense. Thanks!

So are you saying that the solution I mentioned does not describe a free particle wave? I'm not sure how that could be, I have read from multiple sources that it is. Is there a different approach that needs to be taken to achieve a normalizable function?

I am a beginner to quantum mechanics and am trying to make sense of Schrödinger's Equation. I am attempting to find probabilities in the case of a free particle in the general case. It is my understanding that the solution to Schrödinger's Equation in the general case of a free particle is as...

You can use taylor polynomials, if you're familiar with those. \frac{1}{1+x} = f(x) = f(0) + f'(0) x + \frac{f''(0)x^2}{2!} + . . . Notice that the nth derivative evaluated at 0 = (-1)^n. So \frac{1}{1+x} = 1 - x + \frac{x^2}{2!} - \frac{x^3}{3!} + . . . Now let x = 2dsin(ɵ)/r...

My interpretation of special relativity is this. If you were to race a beam of light, it would always beat you by 300,000,000 m/s in your frame of reference, since light goes at this speed relative to you no matter how fast you are going (relative to a "stationary" observer). This is a...

I feel you are contradicting yourself here. You say that the wave function really is complex-valued in a physical way, but the imaginary part is neither physically observable nor useful to think of on its own, which suggests it is not physical but a mathematical convenience, which I suggested...

This post is in General Math because it is focuses on the complex plane and justifications for using it. I do not understand what it means for a wave to have an imaginary part. I can understand expressing a wave as e^(iθ) and then extracting the information you want since complex...

In both case 1 and case 2 you would use the sample variance if the mean is unknown and divide by n-1. If the mean is known, you would divide by n. It does not matter what the actual distribution is or how many samples you have, only whether you know the true value of the mean.

Awesome! Thank you.

I'll provide you with a framework using the gamma distribution. X ~ is ~ Gamma(\alpha_1, \beta); Y ~ is~ Gamma(\alpha_2, \beta) E[e^{t(X+Y)}] = E[e^{tX}]*E[e^{tY}] = (\frac{\beta}{\beta - t})^{\alpha_1} (\frac{\beta}{\beta - t})^{\alpha_2} = (\frac{\beta}{\beta - t})^{\alpha_1 +...

This. If the mean is known, you would compute the variance as follows: E[\frac{\Sigma(X_i - \mu)^2}{n}] = \frac{\Sigma E[(X_i - \mu)^2]}{n} = \frac{\Sigma \sigma^2}{n} = \frac{n * \sigma^2}{n} = \sigma^2 If the mean is unknown, you have to estimate it with the sample mean, x-bar, and...

What are these boundary conditions? My textbook derived the wave equations in a heuristic fashion using partial derivatives, so maybe I could understand it if I knew what these boundary conditions were. Perhaps the material stops inductance somehow? I was told that the wave was due to the...