Recent content by Morberticus

  1. M

    What is the "unoccupied band" referring to in this paper?

    Thanks for the reply. What I'm curious about is why the quantum well is empty, as opposed to containing 20 electrons (1 electron for each 6s orbital of the chain atoms). I.e. If the quantum well has sinusiodal molecular orbitals φi, I would have thought φ11 would be the LUMO instead of φ1...
  2. M

    What is the "unoccupied band" referring to in this paper?

    The abstract of this paper ( http://www.sciencemag.org/content/297/5588/1853 ) says "The electronic properties of the one-dimensional chains are dominated by an unoccupied electron band" I'm not sure what the paper is referring to by an unoccupied electron band. Wouldn't a metal be described...
  3. M

    Trying to invert an expression

    You are right! Sorry, I forgot about the k when writing down the expression(s). The correct expression is n(k) = ∫ cos( k(x-y) ) f(x,y) dxdy Thanks
  4. M

    Trying to invert an expression

    I've come across an expression that looks like n(k) = ∫cos(x-y)f(x,y)dxdy Is there a name for this transform? I would like to invert it to obtain f(x,y) but I'm not used to the 2D integral on the RHS. I tried to turn it into a Fourier transform: n(k) = 1/2 ( ∫eixe-iyf(x,y)dxdy +...
  5. M

    Status of Relativistic Bohmian Mechanics: What Open Questions Remain?

    I am curious about recent progress in relativistic Bohmian mechanics. Finding a review is proving difficult (The closest I can find is a conference paper by H. Nikolic). My understanding is a set of dynamical variables are identified as "real" (beables), and their (usually deterministic)...
  6. M

    Fermi Surface and Orthogonality Catastrophe

    I am reading section 8.5.1 of http://f3.tiera.ru/2/P_Physics/PS_Solid%20state/Giuliani%20G.,%20Vignale%20G.%20Quantum%20theory%20of%20the%20electron%20liquid%20%28CUP,%202005%29%28ISBN%200521821126%29%28799s%29_PS_.pdf (page 442 of the book, page 465 of the pdf). The author claims the...
  7. M

    Weak Form of the Effective Mass Schrodinger Equation

    Hi, I am numerically solving the 2D effective-mass Schrodinger equation \nabla \cdot (\frac{-\hbar^2}{2} c \nabla \psi) + (U - \epsilon) \psi = 0 where c is the effective mass matrix \left( \begin{array}{cc} 1/m^*_x & 1/m^*_{xy} \\ 1/m^*_{yx} & 1/m^*_y \\ \end{array} \right) I know that...
  8. M

    Weak Form of the Poisson Problem

    Hi, I know the weak form of the Poisson problem \nabla^2 \phi = -f looks like \int \nabla \phi \cdot \nabla v = \int f v for all suitable v. Is there a similarly well-known form for the slightly more complicated poisson problem? \nabla (\psi \nabla \phi ) = -f I am writing some finite...
  9. M

    Finite Difference Solution to Poisson's Equation on Irregular Domain

    Hi, Are there any open source C or Fortran libraries for solving 3D Poisson'sequation on an irrefular domain? I'm having difficulty finding them. If not, is there any papers or recipes that would be useful so I could write my own? Speed is not a priority, I just need anything that works...
  10. M

    Brian Cox and the Pauli Exclusion Principle

    I think Cox's position is one I sympathise with, but even non-local realism is under attack. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v446/n7138/full/nature05677.html
  11. M

    Brian Cox and the Pauli Exclusion Principle

    Here's a decent answer on stack exchange (This time in the context of two election "energy levels" in wells with large separation (ignoring other quantum numbers for the moment))...
  12. M

    Brian Cox and the Pauli Exclusion Principle

    Nevermind. I see what you are saying. In non-relativistic qm, the conditional probabilities would have to be the same, which is not obvious. I am in danger of begging the question.
  13. M

    Brian Cox and the Pauli Exclusion Principle

    I believe that is guaranteed if "Brian rubbing/not rubbing diamond" is a complete, orthogonal basis set.
  14. M

    Brian Cox and the Pauli Exclusion Principle

    Sorry, I wasn't using correct notation. By | I meant "and".
  15. M

    Brian Cox and the Pauli Exclusion Principle

    This discussion has been very helpful. Thanks to all involved. I think the conclusion is, in a sentence: The probability P(x) that you measure x in a distant part of the universe is not affected by Brian rubbing a diamond, because it is always P(x) = P(x | Brian rubs diamond) + P(x |...
Back
Top