Eulers equation, i think? leonard suskin

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jerkazoid
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Leonard Susskind's presentation of Euler's equation during a NOVA episode on string theory. The correct formulation of the equation is identified as \(\frac{\Gamma(1-\alpha(s)) \Gamma(1-\alpha(t))}{\Gamma(2-\alpha(s)-\alpha(t))}\), correcting the initial misinterpretation involving a 'z' instead of a '2'. Participants confirm the need for proper bracket placement in the equation, emphasizing the importance of accurate notation in mathematical expressions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Gamma functions and their properties
  • Familiarity with string theory concepts
  • Basic knowledge of mathematical notation and equations
  • Ability to interpret scientific presentations and lectures
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the properties and applications of Gamma functions in mathematics
  • Explore the fundamentals of string theory and its implications in physics
  • Study the significance of Euler's equations in various mathematical contexts
  • Review common notational conventions in mathematical expressions
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, mathematicians, and anyone interested in the nuances of string theory and mathematical notation.

jerkazoid
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
leonard susskind writes this on the chalk board a little after 1/2 way in this Nova episode on String theory

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/programs/ht/qt/3013_03.html
3536633512_73e6d9aedf_o.jpg

am i writing this correctly?

Γ [1-∝(s) Γ (1-∝(t)]
__________________
Γ [z-∝(s) -∝(t)]
edit spelld his name wrong
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Unless I am missing something it seems he missed a bracket. In the numerator there are 4 ( brackets and only 3 ) brackets.
 
Cyosis said:
Unless I am missing something it seems he missed a bracket. In the numerator there are 4 ( brackets and only 3 ) brackets.

but other than that... I am recreating it correctly?

ok so like this right?

Γ [1-∝(s)] Γ [1-∝(t)]
__________________
Γ [z-∝(s) -∝(t)]
 
No, the "Euler equation" they are talking about looks like this:

<br /> \frac{\Gamma(x) \Gamma(y)}{\Gamma(x+y)}<br />

So it should be:

<br /> \frac{\Gamma(1-\alpha(s)) \Gamma(1-\alpha(t))}{\Gamma(2-\alpha(s)-\alpha(t))}<br />

A two not a z.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K