q-hat^-1 ?
in [Relativity]
|
From: George Hammond on 28 Feb 2010 17:56 On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 14:27:14 -0800, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nospam(a)gmail.com> wrote: >Ken S. Tucker wrote: > >> On Feb 27, 6:08 am, "Jay R. Yablon" <jyab...(a)nycap.rr.com> wrote: >>> My query here is in reference to the position operator q-hat, which >>> commutes with the momentum operator p-hat along any single space >>> dimension according to the canonical commutation relationship: >>> >>> [q-hat,p-hat]=i h-bar (1) >>> >>> Query: Is there a known *inverse* position operator q-hat^-1? If so, >>> what is it and can you point out a reference(s) in which it is derived >>> and discussed. > >[snip irrelevancies] > >Ken, did you notice how he asked specifically about obtaining an inverse >position operator? Notice how what you said is completely irrelevant to what >he said? Furthermore, have you noticed that sci.physics.relativity is >completely irrelevant to your followup? > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning?Kruger_effect > > [Hammond] Hey Geese... the correct URL is: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect > Obviously while you suffer from the normal D-K effect, I suffer from the inverse D-K effect. You underestimate me and I overestimate you..... that is, I used to. ======================================== GEORGE HAMMOND'S PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE Primary site http://webspace.webring.com/people/eg/george_hammond Mirror site http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com HAMMOND FOLK SONG by Casey Bennetto http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3 =======================================
From: Ken S. Tucker on 28 Feb 2010 19:06 On Feb 28, 2:56 pm, George Hammond <Nowhe...(a)notspam.com> wrote: > On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 14:27:14 -0800, eric gisse > > > > <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >Ken S. Tucker wrote: > > >> On Feb 27, 6:08 am, "Jay R. Yablon" <jyab...(a)nycap.rr.com> wrote: > >>> My query here is in reference to the position operator q-hat, which > >>> commutes with the momentum operator p-hat along any single space > >>> dimension according to the canonical commutation relationship: > > >>> [q-hat,p-hat]=i h-bar (1) > > >>> Query: Is there a known *inverse* position operator q-hat^-1? If so, > >>> what is it and can you point out a reference(s) in which it is derived > >>> and discussed. > > >[snip irrelevancies] > > >Ken, did you notice how he asked specifically about obtaining an inverse > >position operator? Notice how what you said is completely irrelevant to what > >he said? Furthermore, have you noticed that sci.physics.relativity is > >completely irrelevant to your followup? > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning?Kruger_effect > > [Hammond] > Hey Geese... the correct URL is: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect > > Obviously while you suffer from the normal D-K effect, > I suffer from the inverse D-K effect. You underestimate me > and I overestimate you..... that is, I used to. Jay pitched a nifty curve ball, I swung, hit, maybe fouled, the umps are still deciding. I see the idea of power expressed as a spin, since power is the 'Flux of Energy", and energy is communicated photonically, with spin 1. I'd like to work the asymmetry's. Regards Ken S. Tucker
From: eric gisse on 28 Feb 2010 19:22 George Hammond wrote: > On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 14:27:14 -0800, eric gisse > <jowr.pi.nospam(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>Ken S. Tucker wrote: >> >>> On Feb 27, 6:08 am, "Jay R. Yablon" <jyab...(a)nycap.rr.com> wrote: >>>> My query here is in reference to the position operator q-hat, which >>>> commutes with the momentum operator p-hat along any single space >>>> dimension according to the canonical commutation relationship: >>>> >>>> [q-hat,p-hat]=i h-bar (1) >>>> >>>> Query: Is there a known *inverse* position operator q-hat^-1? If so, >>>> what is it and can you point out a reference(s) in which it is derived >>>> and discussed. >> >>[snip irrelevancies] >> >>Ken, did you notice how he asked specifically about obtaining an inverse >>position operator? Notice how what you said is completely irrelevant to >>what he said? Furthermore, have you noticed that sci.physics.relativity is >>completely irrelevant to your followup? >> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning?Kruger_effect >> >> > [Hammond] > Hey Geese... the correct URL is: >> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect >> > Obviously while you suffer from the normal D-K effect, > I suffer from the inverse D-K effect. You underestimate me > and I overestimate you..... that is, I used to. ....and how long has it been since you were last involuntarily placed in a mental institution, George? > ======================================== > GEORGE HAMMOND'S PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE > Primary site > http://webspace.webring.com/people/eg/george_hammond > Mirror site > http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com > HAMMOND FOLK SONG by Casey Bennetto > http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3 > =======================================
From: eric gisse on 28 Feb 2010 19:23 Ken S. Tucker wrote: [...] > I see the idea of power expressed as a spin, since power is > the 'Flux of Energy", and energy is communicated photonically, > with spin 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect [...]
From: eric gisse on 1 Mar 2010 11:22 Ken S. Tucker wrote: [...] > I think you're right George, it's sinking in to "Geese" that > he'll never be able to play in our scientific sandbox [...] You have never published anything in your life. You have no accomplishments of note.
First
|
Prev
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 Prev: The Implications of the 5th force in Relativity Next: Speed of gravity |