Are they really that hard that are beyond your power of understanding...?
Besides,this guy didn't solve them as part of his class preparation during PhD:
Disclaimer: These "solutions" are my own personal unprofessional attempts at solving the problems. They are officially sanctioned neither by the textbook authors nor by anybody else in particular, they have for the most part not been checked for errors, and, if past precedent is any guide, there is every reason to believe that many of them are dead wrong
Daniel.
#5
selfAdjoint
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
6,843
11
dextercioby said:
Are they really that hard that are beyond your power of understanding...?
I had them along with Patrick in an online course we took usin P&S. Yes they were hard for me and for anyone who comes to them without a year or so of grad physics under their belt. Patrick had that and kindly posted solutions for us.
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles.
Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated...
Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/
by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
I don't know why the electrons in atoms are considered in the orbitals while they could be in sates which are superpositions of these orbitals? If electrons are in the superposition of these orbitals their energy expectation value is also constant, and the atom seems to be stable!