Campuses:
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
classes:2009:fall:phys4101.001:q_a_1030 [2009/11/02 14:09] – x500_sohnx020 | classes:2009:fall:phys4101.001:q_a_1030 [2009/11/30 16:32] (current) – youmans | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
===Blackbox 2:10 - 11/ | ===Blackbox 2:10 - 11/ | ||
Yes, it' a kind of Fourier trick. If you look at the equation 2.144, then you would understand how this proof has been made. | Yes, it' a kind of Fourier trick. If you look at the equation 2.144, then you would understand how this proof has been made. | ||
+ | |||
+ | === Can 10:48 11/06/09 === | ||
+ | For Chap < | ||
====ralph - 11:10AM 10/ | ====ralph - 11:10AM 10/ | ||
Line 35: | Line 38: | ||
I think the point Griffiths is trying to make is that the momentum-position uncertainty principle resembles the energy-time uncertainty principle, primarily because the uncertainty for both is < | I think the point Griffiths is trying to make is that the momentum-position uncertainty principle resembles the energy-time uncertainty principle, primarily because the uncertainty for both is < | ||
+ | ====Dagny==== | ||
+ | What is a good method for finding the determinant of an nxn matrix? Do you think we will need to be able to find such a determinant in this class? Why or why not? | ||
+ | ====Jake22 4:30 11/ | ||
+ | Must all non-degenerate energy eigenfunctions be parity eigenfunctions? | ||
-------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------- | ||
**Return to Q&A main page: [[Q_A]]**\\ | **Return to Q&A main page: [[Q_A]]**\\ | ||
**Q&A for the previous lecture: [[Q_A_1028]]**\\ | **Q&A for the previous lecture: [[Q_A_1028]]**\\ | ||
**Q&A for the next lecture: [[Q_A_1102]]** | **Q&A for the next lecture: [[Q_A_1102]]** |