What Are 'M-M' and 'N-N' Circles in Russian Physics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nomadreid
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Circles Notation
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the terms "m-m" and "n-n" circles as mentioned in a translated Russian physics paper, which are not standard notations in Russian physics. The author initially misinterpreted "n-n" as "non-negative" but later encountered "m-m" circles with imaginary radii, raising confusion about the concept of radius being real. A diagram referenced in the paper depicts an "n-n unit circle" but lacks clarity on its meaning. A Russian physicist consulted confirmed that these terms are not commonly used, suggesting they may stem from a poor translation. The conclusion points to "m-m" likely referring to a hyperboloid in the context of the diagrams presented.
nomadreid
Gold Member
Messages
1,762
Reaction score
248
In a paper translated from the Russian, the author refers to "m-m" and "n-n" circles (including Minkowski circles) and orbits. When I first came across "n-n", I thought it was "non-negative" until I came across the "m-m". In one of the references I went to a diagram referred to, and saw an arc with "n" on each end of the arc referred to as an "n-n unit circle". I have no idea what he is talking about. Is this some standard notation I am unfamiliar with, or some notation perhaps peculiar to Russian?
In the same context, he has "m-m circles" with imaginary radii. I thought a radius was a distance, which is always real. ??
Thanks for guidance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can he talk about hyperboloid which is embedded in Minkowski, because hyperboloids can be thought as a sphere of imaginary radius...
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
thanks, nomather1471. Given the context of the paper, your suggestion makes sense. I stand corrected on my impression that radii were necessarily real.
In the meantime I asked a Russian physicist, who told me that this is not standard notation in Russian either. So my guess is that it is a bad translation, and that the "m-m" is merely a reference to the hyperboloid labeled with a couple of m's in one of his diagrams.
 
In an inertial frame of reference (IFR), there are two fixed points, A and B, which share an entangled state $$ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|0>_A|1>_B+|1>_A|0>_B) $$ At point A, a measurement is made. The state then collapses to $$ |a>_A|b>_B, \{a,b\}=\{0,1\} $$ We assume that A has the state ##|a>_A## and B has ##|b>_B## simultaneously, i.e., when their synchronized clocks both read time T However, in other inertial frames, due to the relativity of simultaneity, the moment when B has ##|b>_B##...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K