Prev: There is no "pull" of gravity, only the PUSH of flowing ether!
Next: Unified Field Solutions
From: Jay R. Yablon on 25 Mar 2010 11:38
Following up on some recent discussion in sci.physics.research about
momentum and position operators, I am trying to clarify how one should
think generally about the energy eigenvalues of the Hamiltonian. This
is laid out in the three page file linked below:

http://jayryablon.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/energy-eigenvalues.pdf

Any help you can provide in getting my thinking straightened out about
this, is appreciated.

Jay
____________________________
Jay R. Yablon
Email: jyablon(a)nycap.rr.com
co-moderator: sci.physics.foundations
Weblog: http://jayryablon.wordpress.com/
Web Site: http://home.roadrunner.com/~jry/FermionMass.htm

From: "Juan R." González-Álvarez on 25 Mar 2010 13:05
Jay R. Yablon wrote on Thu, 25 Mar 2010 11:38:06 -0400:

> Following up on some recent discussion in sci.physics.research about
> momentum and position operators,

Yes one, where again people wasted their times correcting your
mistakes.

Yes one where at least two posters did you that strange suggestion that
your queries are almost always solved in textbooks.

> I am trying to clarify how one should
> think generally about the energy eigenvalues of the Hamiltonian. This
> is laid out in the three page file linked below:
>
> http://jayryablon.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/energy-eigenvalues.pdf
>
> Any help you can provide in getting my thinking straightened out about
> this, is appreciated.

More of the same Jay, "please do the homework for me that finally I will use
your ideas and corrections in the zillionth pdf from mine without even
acknowledge you the time that you have wasted correcting and taughing me."

BEST regards.


--
http://www.canonicalscience.org/

BLOG:
http://www.canonicalscience.org/publications/canonicalsciencetoday/canonicalsciencetoday.html
From: Jay R. Yablon on 25 Mar 2010 13:43
Juan,

I make it a point not to respond to personal flames on Usenet, but I
have no more patience for you.

I was not totally thrilled when Fred and Charles suggested that you be
banned entirely from posting to sci.physics.foundations. But watching
your bedside manner over time, I have come to believe that they were
absolutely correct.

You are nothing but a rude arrogant jerk. Do you ever have a civil
conversation with somebody, or do you always feel the need to bully your
way through a conversation to display your (completely imagined)
superiority? God help anybody who ever had to take a class with you and
ask a question of the professor. For the other students in the class,
you must have been a f***ing nightmare!

You went and attacked Stephen Parrott of all people, viciously, on
sci.physics.research. The moderators there made a mistake letting that
through which I think they now recognize, and Parrott, who is one of the
smartest physics people there is, has said he will not post there any
more because he does not feel like being attacked by flaming jerks.
You, in particular. I would take one Parrott over 1000 of you, and it
is a shame that you made him retreat for now from Usenet posting. I
only hope he reconsiders.

As for you, if you don't like my asking a question, then don't bother
reading my posts. Nobody makes you do that. And don't reply to them
either. There is an old saying: "if you don have something nice to
say, then keep you mouth shut and don't say anything." I have never in
my whole life seen anyone who follows that rule less than you do. You
need to just learn to shut your big f***ing mouth!

Whatever physics you may know, is far outweighed in the negative by your
unremittingly caustic and rude manner. That is the basis on which
Charles and Fred, correctly, banned you from SPF, and they were right.

Jay

From: Robert Israel on 25 Mar 2010 16:37
"Jay R. Yablon" <jyablon(a)nycap.rr.com> writes:

> Following up on some recent discussion in sci.physics.research about
> momentum and position operators, I am trying to clarify how one should
> think generally about the energy eigenvalues of the Hamiltonian. This
> is laid out in the three page file linked below:
>
> http://jayryablon.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/energy-eigenvalues.pdf
>
> Any help you can provide in getting my thinking straightened out about
> this, is appreciated.

The free Hamiltonian has continuous spectrum. There are no eigenvalues
or eigenvectors (in the sense that mathematicians give to those terms).
--
Robert Israel israel(a)math.MyUniversitysInitials.ca
Department of Mathematics http://www.math.ubc.ca/~israel
University of British Columbia Vancouver, BC, Canada
From: Jay R. Yablon on 25 Mar 2010 17:19

"Robert Israel" <israel(a)math.MyUniversitysInitials.ca> wrote in message
news:rbisrael.20100325203421$0c4a(a)news.acm.uiuc.edu...
> "Jay R. Yablon" <jyablon(a)nycap.rr.com> writes:
>
>> Following up on some recent discussion in sci.physics.research about
>> momentum and position operators, I am trying to clarify how one
>> should
>> think generally about the energy eigenvalues of the Hamiltonian.
>> This
>> is laid out in the three page file linked below:
>>
>> http://jayryablon.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/energy-eigenvalues.pdf
>>
>> Any help you can provide in getting my thinking straightened out
>> about
>> this, is appreciated.
>
> The free Hamiltonian has continuous spectrum. There are no
> eigenvalues
> or eigenvectors (in the sense that mathematicians give to those
> terms).

Thanks Robert.

Is there some general set of conditions which tell us the circumstances
under which there will be a continuous spectrum, versus those (such as
the harmonic oscillator) under which there is a discrete spectrum of
eigenvalues?

Jay

> --
> Robert Israel israel(a)math.MyUniversitysInitials.ca
> Department of Mathematics http://www.math.ubc.ca/~israel
> University of British Columbia Vancouver, BC, Canada

 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: There is no "pull" of gravity, only the PUSH of flowing ether!
Next: Unified Field Solutions