Could someone help me figure out how to rotate a coordinate system about the z-axis such that the the line y = mx + c coincides with the x-axis?
Shouldn't a simple projection of all the coordinates i.e xj = xicos(theta), yj =yicos(theta) and zj = zj cos(theta) work?
In terms of using graphene for display. This can be done by mounting the transparent graphene films on transparent polymers. Basically, these films will replace the tradition Indium doped tin oxide films that are not as transparent or conducting. I think graphene is approx. 10 times more...
I would love to learn more. The only coupling I know of is nearest neighbour for Ising model. Basically haven't ventured beyon spin 1/2 systems!
I am sure I can find it in a library. I would really appreciate some help with my mean field theory issue. I can't find a book which describes various...
nono. Not at all. A book which introduces mean field theory. Not at all specific to the Ising model. In fact, I need to see how mean field theory treats Heisenberg and n-potts state(I like calling it that!) models. How it becomes exact for infinite dimensions, etc
I have done upto the mean field treatment for ising model from
"Introduction to stat mech" Chandler which is by no means exhaustive.
I have also read Kerson Huang but again only the Ising model is discussed briefly.
I need a book which deals with few more models in detail.
Homework Statement
Determine approximately the ground state energy of a helium like atom using first order perturbation theory in the electron-electron interaction.
Ignore the spins of the electrons and the Pauli principle.
Homework Equations
given that \intd\tau1\intd\tau2...
I did notice those. They don't (atleast directly) answer this question. Kindly clarify my understanding first and then the question. I am pretty confused at the moment and the forums you mentioned only confuse me further. I am still learning this concept! Those forums are for pros like you!
I am just beginning to understand this concept. Some help would be appreciated.
Let me know if I am wrong in saying the following:
"The wave function (say \Psi] collapses to an eigen vector of the operator corresponding to the physical quantity(say \lambda) being measured. This is because the...
exactly! which is why this question does not arise.
"Are the vectors of an orthonormal basis always the eigenvectors of some Hermitian operator? " (mentioned in the first post)
that is all i was saying.
clarification
Is it not possible that some eigen values corresponding to the vectors in the basis that we have picked are not real values. Even though all the vectors in the basis are orthogonal. Just a thought.