Understanding the Hermitian Form in Velo-Zwanzinger's Article

Renattus
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
hi, i don't have the expression, but my problem is this: in the article of Velo-Zwanzinger appears a step... passing from a equation to other which they call the hermitian form. i going to explain it... this form contains the original form...but appear an extra term..i suppose that it's the hermitian conjugated from the anterior form..so if add the conjugated to the original...i have the hermitian form...is that true??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Renattus said:
hi, i don't have the expression, but my problem is this: in the article of Velo-Zwanzinger appears a step... passing from a equation to other which they call the hermitian form. i going to explain it... this form contains the original form...but appear an extra term..i suppose that it's the hermitian conjugated from the anterior form..so if add the conjugated to the original...i have the hermitian form...is that true??

Since you're new here, you should probably read the posting guidelines first.
You're more likely to get a useful answer if you:

(a) cite specific references,

(b) include more context in your question (including some formulas or equations in latex if you're asking about some math),

(c) Use complete English sentences. (Even though you're apparently not a native English speaker, I think you could compose your question better than the above.)
 
well...i'm new here..and I'm not a native english speaker..so i just want to tell me about hermitian form... how can i put into hermitian form a motion equation... i think i don't have to include the equation ('cause it's large)..just explain me (if you can, course)...
i'm studying the rarita-schwinger equation for particles with s=3/2... when i consider an interaction with an electromagnetic field... (velo-zwanzinger problem) the expression changes to a complicated form...i don't have my eq. but ..can you explain me...why do i have to put into hermitian form a motion equation?.
sorry for my english...i'm not a very good writer..
 
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!
According to recent podcast between Jacob Barandes and Sean Carroll, Barandes claims that putting a sensitive qubit near one of the slits of a double slit interference experiment is sufficient to break the interference pattern. Here are his words from the official transcript: Is that true? Caveats I see: The qubit is a quantum object, so if the particle was in a superposition of up and down, the qubit can be in a superposition too. Measuring the qubit in an orthogonal direction might...

Similar threads

Back
Top