Talk:Schrödinger equation: Difference between revisions
imported>Robert Tito mNo edit summary |
imported>Markus Baumeister (Related to Schroedingers cat?) |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
Good idea; I'll get right on that. Thanks for the link. [[User:Michael Evans|Michael Evans]] | Good idea; I'll get right on that. Thanks for the link. [[User:Michael Evans|Michael Evans]] | ||
And IMHO the most important missing information (at least for a non-physicist who doesn't even try to understand the equations) is: Does this equation have something to do with the observability properties of quantum states (aka "Schrödingers Cat")? | |||
--[[User:Markus Baumeister|Markus Baumeister]] 15:10, 20 February 2007 (CST) | |||
== 3D Schrödinger in Cartesian coordinates, and other coordinates? == | == 3D Schrödinger in Cartesian coordinates, and other coordinates? == | ||
Revision as of 15:10, 20 February 2007
Umlaut
Anyone know how to type the O with a colon over it in Schrodinger...?
- I do not know, but you can always copy-paste. --Alex Halicz (hello) 11:43, 8 February 2007 (CST)
Easy when you are on a MAC, cut and paste when you do not have easy access. Robert Tito | Talk 11:44, 8 February 2007 (CST)
concepts in quantum theory
Can I suggest some discussion of its physical implications (eg quantized energy levels in atoms) in addition to the math. The first mention in The Feynman lectures on Physics, Volume III, Feynman's red book is a good model Cheers David Tribe 15:55, 12 February 2007 (CST) David, would you mind sticking to biology? (Attention: David has a big nose.) Robert Tito | Talk 16:53, 12 February 2007 (CST)
Your dutch phraseology RT has deterred me enuf to make sure I leave the article itself alone. So I now hesitate before leaving this as a possible link
- Why Quantum Mechanics Is Not So Weird after All PAUL QUINCEY. Richard Feynman's "least-action" approach to quantum physics in effect shows that it is just classical physics constrained by a simple mechanism. When the complicated mathematics is left aside, valuable insights are gained. David Tribe 19:18, 12 February 2007 (CST)
Good idea; I'll get right on that. Thanks for the link. Michael Evans
And IMHO the most important missing information (at least for a non-physicist who doesn't even try to understand the equations) is: Does this equation have something to do with the observability properties of quantum states (aka "Schrödingers Cat")?
--Markus Baumeister 15:10, 20 February 2007 (CST)
3D Schrödinger in Cartesian coordinates, and other coordinates?
Is the plan to give the Q.E. in 3D-cartesian, cilinder, polar coordinate? Robert Tito | Talk 01:31, 18 February 2007 (CST)
I can do that; I'll probably just put the cylindrical and spherical versions underneath the 3-d Cartesian (which is already there, see the eqn. with the Laplacian?). Michael Evans
Why not put the laplacian in (I guess more known goniometric form (sin/cos, i) )? Besides the idea of an operator somehow comes out of the blue (where it follows 19th centurian hamiltonian physics). Just a few thoughts. Robert Tito | Talk 14:06, 18 February 2007 (CST)