Recent content by pines-demon

2025 Clarivate Citations Laureates for Physics (list of tentative candidates for the Nobel Prize in Physics) are in: Ingrid Daubechies, Stéphane Mallat and Yves Meyer, "for advancing wavelet theory, a revolution in mathematics and physics with practical applications including image processing"...

Yes, Schrödinger looks more like a diffusion equation with imaginary prefactors. That does not matter you can render the ordinary wave equation first order in time if you want: ##(\partial_x-c^{-1}\partial_t)\phi=0##. Yes.

Thanks, I prefer reading so I found S. Weinberg, "The Trouble of Quantum Mechanics" (2017), The New York Review It might be found easily on the web. It is basically an edited transcript of the lecture. Basically Weinberg says that he is not convinced by many-worlds interpretation or the...

Clarivate Citations are scheduled for the 25 September, tune in at that time. Meanwhile you can check Veritasium's video on the biography of Alfred Nobel:

What was Weinberg take on interpretations? he scores a bit low in orthodoxy.

But do you at least have the electric field inside and outside the medium?

Don't worry Ballentine made it to the list.

Can you tell me what is the electric field inside the fluid and outside (at least an example)?

Im reading this on a phone so maybe I am missing something. But the electric field is different inside and outside the medium, the discontinuity is proportional to the surface charge.

Was there a previous discussion on this paper?

There might be some rigorous way to check, but the fact that we have many examples, makes it obvious that the two theories coincide at that limit (Dirac equation reduces to Pauli/Schrödinger equation, Mott scattering reduces to Rutherford scattering, beta decay through W boson reduces to Fermi...

This question looks like if you were asking for why are particles spinning, do not confuse spin (intrinsic quantum property) with spatial rotation, particles cannot rotate.

My bad, I meant differentiable.

The potential is not a function that is differentiable in the usual way (at least not for the infinite well, for the finite well you might use Dirac deltas). Edit: typo

Well usually ##[f(x),p]=i\hbar \partial f/\partial x ##, for a function ##f(x)##, but the potential here is kind of troublesome.