Recent content by MaverickMenzies

  1. M

    Nuclear reactor physics text recommendation

    Hi folks, can anyone suggest a good and current reference text on nuclear reactor theory and physics? I'm a theorist, so mathematically sophisticated presentation is welcome. Thanks in advance for any recommendations.
  2. M

    Superselection Rule: Definition & Meaning

    When I've encountered super-selection rules (SSR) in the past (in the context of quantum mechanics) they have been presented as violations of the superposition principle. Thus, it requires picking a preferred set of commutating self-adjoint operators and declaring only these are observables for...
  3. M

    Do Quantum Mechanics Interpretations Challenge Classical Views of Reality?

    It is possible to provide a lorentz covariant description of quantum state description. For example, see chapter 11 of "The theory of open quantum systems" by H. P. Breuer and F. Petruccione (2006).
  4. M

    Will quantum computers ever be possible?

    How so? The MWI requires that the axioms of quantum mechanics be taken as fundamental - we live in quantum universe and everything has a fundamental quantum description. In contrast, (as I understand it) the CI splits reality into classical and quantum systems and doesn't advance the view of...
  5. M

    The measurement problem and approaches to quantum gravity

    Hi, does anyone know whether any of the current approaches to Quantum Gravity shed any light on the measurement problem in quantum mechanics? Moreover have there been any attempts to consider the implications of the measurement problem from within either the string theory approach or the quantum...
  6. M

    Position vs. Harmonic basis for solving S.E.

    In my experience, (in quantum optics) using the fock (i.e. eigenstates of the simple harmonic oscillator) basis to solve the SE can be messy depending on the Hamiltonian. For example, a beam splitter transforms fock states in a complicated manner, but its action on quadrature eigenstates...
  7. M

    Composite Hilbert Spaces and Operators

    You can find some operators that are simple tensor products of local operators, however, in general any operator acting on the composite space can be decomposed as a linear combination of products of dyad operators. To see this use the completeness relation (i.e. that the sum of projection...
  8. M

    Is there a fundamental flaw in our understanding of space and conservation laws?

    I have another (probably pointless) question concerning MWI. In the case of a pure entangled state between our quantum system and observer, MWI provides an interpretation for |spin-up> |a> + |spin-down>|b>, in that each term of the superposition should be treated as a separate copy of...
  9. M

    Is there a fundamental flaw in our understanding of space and conservation laws?

    I was wondering if I could interrupt this discussion with a question about MWI? According to MWI everything is quantum and has as associated state space and that "measurements" are just entangling unitary operations between systems (one of which will be the system of interest and the other...
  10. M

    An argument against Background Independence

    If this is the case, then I would suggest reading this: http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0611006
  11. M

    An argument against Background Independence

    Bananan, is this interpretation of general relativity connected to the Whitehead theory of gravitation?
  12. M

    Geometric and Physical Interpretation of Diagonalization

    The physical interpretation of this result is that if you can simultaneously diagonalise two matrices then the corresponding operators (if the matrices in question are Hermitian) are compatiable. This means that they commute since it is possible to find a commom eigenvector basis for both of the...
  13. M

    Questions on Entanglement and Double-Slit Experiment

    Does anyone know of any work done that tries to connect nonlocality with locality. For example, has anyone started by accepting a nonlocal microphysics (i.e. orthodox QM) and derived from it a local theory or even the other way round? This (to me) seems a more interesting question than the...
  14. M

    Discover the Exp Operator Expansion Identity for Form-Based Operators

    I don't see how. The BHC formula states that: e^{\hat{A} + \hat{B}} = e^{- [ \hat{A}, \hat{B} ]/2} e^{\hat{A}} e^{\hat{B}} when [\hat{A},[\hat{A},\hat{B}]] = [\hat{B},[\hat{A},\hat{B}]] i.e. it refers to the sum of operators in an expotential. I want to decompose a product of...
Back
Top