Vector Notation in Nolting Theoretical Physics 1

Teclis
Messages
25
Reaction score
2
On pg. 60 of Nolting Theoretical Physics 1 for the definition of a vector multiplied by a scalar the book shows two little up arrows if the scalar is greater than zero and an little up arrow and then a little down arrow if the scalar is less than zero. Then again on pg. 61 for definition 1.139 there are two little up arrows (similar to particle spin notation) in between the unit vector and the vector.

What do these little pairs of arrows mean? I have never seen this notation for vectors before. Could someone please explain their semantics?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
For reference, this is the excerpt of that definition:
upload_2018-3-13_8-42-7.png


This property is saying that ##\alpha\bf a## is parallel to (i.e., same direction as) ##\bf a## if ##\alpha > 0## and anti-parallel to (i.e., opposite direction) ##\bf a## if ##\alpha < 0##. Not mentioning this (I did not find it anywhere) seems like a serious omission by the author. In particular as the preliminaries seem to aim on defining what the student needs to know about vectors.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-3-13_8-42-7.png
    upload_2018-3-13_8-42-7.png
    5.9 KB · Views: 579
  • Like
Likes Teclis and DrClaude
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top