Understanding Vector Theory Proofs: Solutions to Common Questions

latentcorpse
Messages
1,411
Reaction score
0
In the notes attached here:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=3042019#post3042019
(apparently I can't attach the same thing in multiple threads?)
I have quite a few problems with one of the proofs. In the proof of the proposition on p15,

a) he says to note that \nu(0)=0. why is this?

b) he goes from
\{ \frac{d}{dt} [ \alpha ( x^\mu ( \lambda(t)) - x^\mu(p)) + \beta (x^\mu(\kapa(t))-x^\mu(p)) + x^\mu(p)] \}_{t=0} = [ \alpha ( \frac{d x^\mu ( \lambda (t))}{dt})_{t=0} + \beta ( \frac{dx^\mu ( \kappa ( t))}{dt} )_{t=0}]
I really don't understand how these two lines are equal at all!
And also how can we change the \phi's to x^\mu's in going from eqn 25 to the defn of Z_p(f)?

c) where does eqn 27 come from? isn't ( \frac{\partial}{\partial x^\mu})_p (f) = \frac{\partial f}{\partial x^\mu})_p
is it something like if we compose the numerator with \phi^{-1} then we have to cancel that out by composing the p with \phi to give the \phi(p)? I don't really get why this is allowed though?

d)Where does eqn 29 come from?

Thanks a lot for any help. I really need to get my head round all this vector business over the holidays!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For a, \lambda(0)=\kappa(0)=p, so once you plug those in you get
\nu(0)=\phi^{-1}(\alpha(\phi(p)-\phi(p)) + \beta(\phi(p)-\phi(p) +\phi(p)) = \phi^{-1}(\phi(p)) = p (not 0 like you say in your post)

For (b), just distribute the derivative linearly. Then \frac{d x^{\mu}(p)}{dt} = 0 because p is just a fixed point, so that's just the derivative of a number
 
Office_Shredder said:
For a, \lambda(0)=\kappa(0)=p, so once you plug those in you get
\nu(0)=\phi^{-1}(\alpha(\phi(p)-\phi(p)) + \beta(\phi(p)-\phi(p) +\phi(p)) = \phi^{-1}(\phi(p)) = p (not 0 like you say in your post)

For (b), just distribute the derivative linearly. Then \frac{d x^{\mu}(p)}{dt} = 0 because p is just a fixed point, so that's just the derivative of a number

hi there. thanks for your answers.

do you have any ideas for c) or d) or also, how we get teh formula for Z-p(f) in the first place?

thanks!
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top