Talk:Solid harmonics: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Paul Wormer No edit summary |
imported>Jitse Niesen (explain my issue) |
||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
::What do you think it should be? --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 09:21, 24 August 2007 (CDT) | ::What do you think it should be? --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 09:21, 24 August 2007 (CDT) | ||
:::I may well be misunderstanding what the article is saying. My issue is that you say first that, in spherical coordinates, | |||
::::<math> \nabla^2 = \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial r^2}r - \frac{L^2}{r^2} </math>. | |||
:::If I try to substitute | |||
::::<math> \mathbf{L} = -i\hbar\, (\mathbf{r} \times \mathbf{\nabla}), </math> | |||
:::then I get | |||
::::<math> \nabla^2 = \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial r^2}r + \frac{\hbar^2}{r^2} (\mathbf{r} \times \mathbf{\nabla}) \cdot (\mathbf{r} \times \mathbf{\nabla}). </math> | |||
:::But the Laplacian should be independent of hbar. Perhaps the problem is in the first formula, and it should be | |||
::::<math> \nabla^2\Phi(\mathbf{r}) = \left(\frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial r^2}r - \frac{L^2}{\hbar^2r^2}\right)\Phi(\mathbf{r}) = 0 , \qquad \mathbf{r} \ne \mathbf{0}. </math> | |||
:::I hope you can make sense of it. It's ten years ago that I did this stuff, and I never did it properly. -- [[User:Jitse Niesen|Jitse Niesen]] 09:53, 24 August 2007 (CDT) |
Revision as of 08:53, 24 August 2007
Workgroup category or categories | Physics Workgroup, Mathematics Workgroup [Categories OK] |
Article status | Developing article: beyond a stub, but incomplete |
Underlinked article? | Yes |
Basic cleanup done? | No |
Checklist last edited by | --Paul Wormer 04:18, 22 August 2007 (CDT) |
To learn how to fill out this checklist, please see CZ:The Article Checklist.
This article (my own article from Wikipedia) gave LaTeX errors which I worked around. Added to WP version section on relation to regular and irregular solid harmonics and references. --Paul Wormer 04:18, 22 August 2007 (CDT)
- Hi Paul. Is the definition of the orbital angular momentum (second displayed equation) correct? The factor seems out of place. -- Jitse Niesen 08:01, 24 August 2007 (CDT)
- Hallo Jitse, I don't see what is wrong. Classically :
- QM:
- What do you think it should be? --Paul Wormer 09:21, 24 August 2007 (CDT)
- Hallo Jitse, I don't see what is wrong. Classically :
- I may well be misunderstanding what the article is saying. My issue is that you say first that, in spherical coordinates,
- .
- If I try to substitute
- then I get
- But the Laplacian should be independent of hbar. Perhaps the problem is in the first formula, and it should be
- I hope you can make sense of it. It's ten years ago that I did this stuff, and I never did it properly. -- Jitse Niesen 09:53, 24 August 2007 (CDT)
- I may well be misunderstanding what the article is saying. My issue is that you say first that, in spherical coordinates,
Categories:
- Physics Category Check
- General Category Check
- Mathematics Category Check
- Category Check
- Advanced Articles
- Nonstub Articles
- Internal Articles
- Physics Advanced Articles
- Physics Nonstub Articles
- Physics Internal Articles
- Mathematics Advanced Articles
- Mathematics Nonstub Articles
- Mathematics Internal Articles
- Developed Articles
- Physics Developed Articles
- Mathematics Developed Articles
- Developing Articles
- Physics Developing Articles
- Mathematics Developing Articles
- Stub Articles
- Physics Stub Articles
- Mathematics Stub Articles
- External Articles
- Physics External Articles
- Mathematics External Articles
- Physics Underlinked Articles
- Underlinked Articles
- Mathematics Underlinked Articles
- Physics Cleanup
- General Cleanup
- Mathematics Cleanup
- Cleanup