Recent content by KWillets

The main reason given is repeatability: the measurement gives the same result if repeated. That means the state remains in the subset of state space corresponding to the value of the first measurement. The "value" is not just a number on a gauge, it's also all the knowledge that went into...

[You're using the equation for frequency, not wavelength. The reason that's difficult is that phase velocity is not constant, so you can't just use the inverse as the wavelength. De Broglie derived the dispersion relation vgroup*vphase = c2, where vgroup is the particle velocity.

What is K?

De Broglie started with an "internal frequency" in the rest frame which has the same phase everywhere (infinite phase velocity). When such a frequency is Lorentz-transformed into moving frames, relativity of simultaneity means that the phase in the new frame must vary spatially as well as...

My understanding is that despite an extended wavefunction, particles interact as if they are pointlike. Radius can't be determined to infinite precision, so the best one can say is that no nonzero radius has been found yet. The wavefunction is an important part of scattering calculations as I...

A man named de Broglie already did this.

p = 0 implies an infinite phase velocity and wavelength, relative to you.

I was curious what he meant by "deterministic1 model", so I read the paper, and the erratum states that "local deterministic model" was intended there, a fairly crucial typo. Perhaps that's what he means by classical system? I don't think he's trying to revise interpretations here, just...

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=gps+atmospheric+correction But I suppose it's worth saying there's also a lot of cross-calibration, measurement from known points, etc., so it would be hard for an error to creep in.

Just to clarify, I had stated that kinetic E might be correct in an earlier thread, but I was wrong, and my later posts had more correct information. Also, my QM textbook mentions that dispersion of the wavepacket is not significant in the lifetime of the universe or some such. I can look it...

This is basically one aspect of de Broglie. He postulated (extending from photons) that E is proportional to an intrinsic frequency. As mass increases relativistically with velocity, frequency increases. That rule is quite simple. The trick is to get this all to work with SR, since a...

I can't tell for sure, but you seem to be confusing phase velocity and group velocity. I labelled a few of the v's in the quote below. (And more importantly, v_{phase} = v_{group} = c . For photons, the two factors are indistinguishable, but for massive particles, v_{phase}v_{group} = c^2...

Thanks for this -- I was thinking this morning it should be a nice short derivation.

My reference gives: c_{phase}=\frac{\omega}{\kappa} and c_{group}=\frac{d\omega}{d\kappa} where \kappa=2\pi/\lambda

"There is simply one system moving at constant velocity v and oscillating with one frequency v0" -- I believe he's stating that there's no application of group velocity to this system, simply due to the lack of multiple frequencies to mix. Do you have access to this paper?