Recent content by torito_verdejo

Thanks for the detailed answer, it really helped me. I guess I'll leave Galois theory as a summer reading. Concerning algebraic geometry, I thought it would be applicable to theoretical physics simply and naively because it's something I can't stop hearing about (and it sounds sexy, hahaha). I...

Actually I didn't and, now that I think of it, it would certainly be extremely useful. I'll think of it further, as there is also a course in numerical analysis at my disposal. Nevertheless I must confess that this mathematical courses I'll be taking are choosen more for pleasure than for...

Hi, you all, I am an undegrad Physics student and I'm choosing my optional courses for my third year. I'm looking for advice (or opinions, if you prefer) since I'm not sure what of the following mathematical, optional courses would be more "beneficial" (I know this term is abstract) to my...

OK, I was thinking this in a very stupid way. I see that you cannot treat the problem as two point particles. When you represent the problem by a charged ball inside of which is a positive particle, the bigger the distance from the center, the stronger the electric field.

What I can´'t get is why they can get a little apart without doing it totally. And I´'m talking about atoms. How does the force increase between electrons and the nucleus in order to compensate the increase distance between them.

I can understand that, but couldn't you explain a bit more how the force between the electron cloud and the nucleus increases to compensate the polarization?

From what I could understand, without external perturbation the nucleus and its cloud of electrons are in an energetic balance. Nevertheless, when they are put in an electric field, the nucleus moves in its direction and the cloud in the opposite. Now, this electric field apart from a torsion...

Thank you, this solved my doubt.

Thank you for the detailed explanation. :)

The final result will only differ in its sign, but this is crucial. Having a positively, radially oriented electric field ##\textbf{E}##, I understand that the sign of the integral should be positive (## - (- A) = A##), but it is not! How and why is this the case? A line integral where the...

You're right, the second answer does so! (hard palm face on me) https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/339364/230605 Thank you very much. :)

I get that derivation, but I think it doesn't explicitly answer what I'm asking. I'm asking why what is obtained from the integral of a closed sphere (i.e. ##\Phi_E=\frac{Q_{enclosed}}{\epsilon_0}##) holds for any other closed surface. Where does the shape independence come from?

I have read multiple threads on Physics Forums, Stackexchange and Quora, as well as the explanation of Gauss Law, but still don't understand the most fundamental aspect of it: its applicability for any kind of surface. More precisely, I don't get how this follows from the fact that...

Thank you for the references!

I'm looking for recommendations about advanced calculus books. I'm interested in going further and deeper than nth-order linear differential equations, but overall as a Physics student I'm deeply interested in being very, very comfortable dealing with line, surface and volume integration...