- #1

- 17

- 0

- Thread starter Kamper
- Start date

- #1

- 17

- 0

- #2

- 17

- 0

My iPad's autocorrect, one might question whether the name is fitting, is playing around.

- #3

- 123

- 2

- #4

- 17

- 0

And wouldn't one risk missing important points if one's system evaluation is non relativistic?

- #5

George Jones

Staff Emeritus

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 7,394

- 1,030

If you drop your keys, do you use general relativity to calculate how long it takes your keys to hit the ground?

And wouldn't one risk missing important points if one's system evaluation is non relativistic?

- #6

- 17

- 0

Well, depends ón how meticulous you are...;-)If you drop your keys, do you use general relativity to calculate how long it takes your keys to hit the ground?

- #7

- 17

- 0

On*

My apologies

My apologies

- #8

- 123

- 2

Even with gravitation, for pratical issues Newton's law is fairly used because it is a very good approximation, and a 5cm error when computing the position of the moon is not a big deal.

The thing is, when dealing with a problem one has to evaluate in what regime the problem undergoes. Sometimes the system always stays in a classical regime and it is a very good approximation to use non-relativistic results.

Of course when in doubt use the complete theory and then proceed to evaluate the contribution of relativistic corrections to see of their importance.

For theoretical purposes, always use the complete theory, and then compute in different regimes if necessary. I would say this is a kind of 'common sense' aproach.

- #9

- 17

- 0

Suppose one is examining the hydrogen atom and one is in doubt whether to use the Schrodinger or the Dirac equation. Would one then proceed with the Dirac or, if only the low energy states are of interest, use the Schrodinger?