• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 06:18
CEST 12:18
KST 19:18
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru3BGE Stara Zagora 2025: Info & Preview27Code S RO12 Preview: GuMiho, Bunny, SHIN, ByuN3The Memories We Share - Facing the Final(?) GSL47Code S RO12 Preview: Cure, Zoun, Solar, Creator4
Community News
BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack2Weekly Cups (June 2-8): herO doubles down1[BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates9GSL Ro4 and Finals moved to Sunday June 15th13Weekly Cups (May 27-June 1): ByuN goes back-to-back0
StarCraft 2
General
Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing DreamHack Dallas 2025 - Official Replay Pack BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation
Tourneys
[GSL 2025] Code S:Season 2 - RO8 - Group A Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) Bellum Gens Elite: Stara Zagora 2025 $3,500 WardiTV European League 2025
Strategy
[G] Darkgrid Layout Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] PvT Cheese: 13 Gate Proxy Robo
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady Mutation # 476 Charnel House Mutation # 475 Hard Target Mutation # 474 Futile Resistance
Brood War
General
BW General Discussion BGH auto balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ FlaSh Witnesses SCV Pull Off the Impossible vs Shu StarCraft & BroodWar Campaign Speedrun Quest Will foreigners ever be able to challenge Koreans?
Tourneys
[ASL19] Grand Finals [BSL20] GosuLeague RO16 - Tue & Wed 20:00+CET NA Team League 6/8/2025 [Megathread] Daily Proleagues
Strategy
I am doing this better than progamers do. [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Path of Exile What do you want from future RTS games? Armies of Exigo - YesYes?
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
LiquidLegends to reintegrate into TL.net
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Vape Nation Thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
Maru Fan Club Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Korean Music Discussion [Manga] One Piece
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
A Better Routine For Progame…
TrAiDoS
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Heero Yuy & the Tax…
KrillinFromwales
I was completely wrong ab…
jameswatts
Need Your Help/Advice
Glider
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 32058 users

Quantum Mechanics - Page 2

Blogs > 0x64
Post a Reply
Prev 1 2 3 Next All
rei
Profile Blog Joined October 2002
United States3594 Posts
March 31 2013 13:30 GMT
#21
I love you, time to learn
GET OUT OF MY BASE CHILL
iamho
Profile Joined June 2009
United States3347 Posts
March 31 2013 15:18 GMT
#22
I used to think quantum physics was awesome until I took a class on it.. Then I realized it was pretty much the standard "here's some equations someone smarter than you derived, manipulate them and do math" type of thing. Also I still have no idea what the conceptual explanation for matrices and eigenvectors are, despite acing the class. To the math purists out there, I'd say that as a non-physics major, the non-math explanations and the pop science I read were both far more engaging and useful than the equations.
0x64
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Finland4544 Posts
March 31 2013 19:26 GMT
#23
On April 01 2013 00:18 iamho wrote:
I used to think quantum physics was awesome until I took a class on it.. Then I realized it was pretty much the standard "here's some equations someone smarter than you derived, manipulate them and do math" type of thing. Also I still have no idea what the conceptual explanation for matrices and eigenvectors are, despite acing the class. To the math purists out there, I'd say that as a non-physics major, the non-math explanations and the pop science I read were both far more engaging and useful than the equations.


That's how I feel, I know how university physics is taught and I've seen it been taught almost precisely the same way all around the globe almost from the same books.
There is something different when a Nobelist put his mind to work on how he could explain the things he understand to the people that don't need actually to understand the specific.

Need I remind you guys, that this is the definition of a good scientific paper; one should be able to read a paper with a general understanding of the field or even better with a scientific general education.

Well anyway, I tend, with time, to think there is more value on the way the message is delivered than university put effort into.
And if a lecturer can't deliver the message better than a great lecturer, then record once the damn lecture and distribute it to the whole world. Have the lecturer use his hours on explaining and answering questions about the lecture instead of trying to produce something similar.
Dump of assembler code from 0xffffffec to 0x64: End of assembler dump.
0x64
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Finland4544 Posts
March 31 2013 19:29 GMT
#24
And physics, I believe is one of the most dependent area, where the quality of the lecturer can help you "get it".

Electromagnetism, the math behind, all seems so disconnected.
It is possible to learn how to calculate and yet not even understanding what you are doing and why. Scary?

Dump of assembler code from 0xffffffec to 0x64: End of assembler dump.
micronesia
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States24648 Posts
March 31 2013 20:15 GMT
#25
On April 01 2013 04:29 0x64 wrote:
And physics, I believe is one of the most dependent area, where the quality of the lecturer can help you "get it".

Electromagnetism, the math behind, all seems so disconnected.
It is possible to learn how to calculate and yet not even understanding what you are doing and why. Scary?

It is scarier when this happens in practical settings. For example, an engineer who is strong with computers may use matlab simulations to find solutions to problems without actually understanding the underlying issue causing the problem, and how this solution addresses (or shorts) them.
ModeratorThere are animal crackers for people and there are people crackers for animals.
0x64
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Finland4544 Posts
March 31 2013 21:08 GMT
#26
On April 01 2013 05:15 micronesia wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 01 2013 04:29 0x64 wrote:
And physics, I believe is one of the most dependent area, where the quality of the lecturer can help you "get it".

Electromagnetism, the math behind, all seems so disconnected.
It is possible to learn how to calculate and yet not even understanding what you are doing and why. Scary?

It is scarier when this happens in practical settings. For example, an engineer who is strong with computers may use matlab simulations to find solutions to problems without actually understanding the underlying issue causing the problem, and how this solution addresses (or shorts) them.


Hah, now I'm scarred, thanks!
Dump of assembler code from 0xffffffec to 0x64: End of assembler dump.
Teoita
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
Italy12246 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-03-31 23:22:17
March 31 2013 23:00 GMT
#27
Jesus quantum mechanics was the most rage inducing exam i have ever taken.

On the other hand, "uh, it seems like two operators don't commute here" is a great expression for when anything doesn't work as it should >.>
ModeratorProtoss all-ins are like a wok. You can throw whatever you want in there and it will turn out alright.
rei
Profile Blog Joined October 2002
United States3594 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-04-01 20:47:35
April 01 2013 01:30 GMT
#28
ok on the first video, he mention the probability of photons reflecting off the surface of the water is a 4% reflection and 96% of the photons goes straight through, and he said that it's measured result and no one has figured out why yet. did i get what he said right? if i did, and i remember when photons make contact with an atom, if it's the right wave length, it will get absorb, and after absorbing the photon, the atom returns to it's ground stats and release a photon of the same wave length in a random direction. Does that mean out of that 4% reflection, every one of those re-released photons is traveling in the same direction of the reflection?

Nobody here can answer this?

could it be that it is not every one of those 4% reflects into the detector, instead all of the photons who hits an atom gets absorbed if it's the right wave length, and only 4% of them gets absorbed and reflect and that percentage depends on the material since different material compose of different atoms and hence difference electron orbitals that requires different activation energy to make the electron go to excited state and then back to ground state and re-emit a photon in a random direction.

and that 4% of photons gets re-emitted by the reflecting material's atoms will be traveling in random direction, yet because photon have wave property the only place these random directed photons didn't cancel each other's wave out is at the exact angle in which the sum of all vectors of those photons have the shortest path. If you put the detector at that exact place you would count 4% of the total photons and if you place that detector elsewhere you would count less than 4%?

did i get this right?
GET OUT OF MY BASE CHILL
felisconcolori
Profile Blog Joined October 2011
United States6168 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-04-01 05:41:03
April 01 2013 05:37 GMT
#29
What I think is really scary about Quantum Mechanics (and quantum physics in general) is that when you get out to the bleeding edge and around some effects, even WITH the math, you can see how something happens, describe it... but still be baffled by why it's happening. There are things in quantum theory that even leading researchers will look at, smile, and go "I have no freaking idea" when you ask "Well, why does it do that?"

Which is why I think the math is generally necessary. Some things mathematically let you see the logic behind and with the more imprecise English descriptions.

And the English descriptions can get engaging and go right on into "WTF" land - but are still pretty damned cool.

All else aside, I think QM is a pretty cool area of physics. Much cooler than all that string stuff.

On April 01 2013 06:08 0x64 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 01 2013 05:15 micronesia wrote:
On April 01 2013 04:29 0x64 wrote:
And physics, I believe is one of the most dependent area, where the quality of the lecturer can help you "get it".

Electromagnetism, the math behind, all seems so disconnected.
It is possible to learn how to calculate and yet not even understanding what you are doing and why. Scary?

It is scarier when this happens in practical settings. For example, an engineer who is strong with computers may use matlab simulations to find solutions to problems without actually understanding the underlying issue causing the problem, and how this solution addresses (or shorts) them.


Hah, now I'm scarred, thanks!


Actually, that sounds like a lot of engineering I know. They don't really care WHY something works the way it does - they are more concerned with what they can do with the properties available to them. If it works in whatever way it works, that's great, they can use that. If it doesn't impact what they are trying to do with something, they really aren't that interested in the deeper questions. A civil engineer only cares about how strong concrete is under specific conditions and if it is suitable for the application they're using it for - not why cement bonds together in the first place.
Yes, I email sponsors... to thank them. Don't post drunk, kids. My king, what has become of you?
micronesia
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States24648 Posts
April 01 2013 14:47 GMT
#30
On April 01 2013 14:37 felisconcolori wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 01 2013 06:08 0x64 wrote:
On April 01 2013 05:15 micronesia wrote:
On April 01 2013 04:29 0x64 wrote:
And physics, I believe is one of the most dependent area, where the quality of the lecturer can help you "get it".

Electromagnetism, the math behind, all seems so disconnected.
It is possible to learn how to calculate and yet not even understanding what you are doing and why. Scary?

It is scarier when this happens in practical settings. For example, an engineer who is strong with computers may use matlab simulations to find solutions to problems without actually understanding the underlying issue causing the problem, and how this solution addresses (or shorts) them.


Hah, now I'm scarred, thanks!


Actually, that sounds like a lot of engineering I know. They don't really care WHY something works the way it does - they are more concerned with what they can do with the properties available to them. If it works in whatever way it works, that's great, they can use that. If it doesn't impact what they are trying to do with something, they really aren't that interested in the deeper questions. A civil engineer only cares about how strong concrete is under specific conditions and if it is suitable for the application they're using it for - not why cement bonds together in the first place.

Sometimes a lack of actual understanding of what's going on can have serious unforeseen consequences. Maybe this adjustment matlab told you to do makes the bridge stronger, but because you relied solely on the computer simulation and didn't actually analyze it yourself, you didn't realize that the bridge is now much more susceptible to resonance, weathering, or some thing your simulation didn't take into account. While common, this is quite a dangerous way to do science.
ModeratorThere are animal crackers for people and there are people crackers for animals.
Teoita
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
Italy12246 Posts
April 01 2013 14:56 GMT
#31
And also the reason why engineers are teased all the time :D

Dr Cooper...Dr Koothrappali...Dr Hofstadter...Mr Wolowitz!
ModeratorProtoss all-ins are like a wok. You can throw whatever you want in there and it will turn out alright.
Recognizable
Profile Blog Joined December 2011
Netherlands1552 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-04-01 16:06:32
April 01 2013 16:06 GMT
#32
On April 01 2013 00:18 iamho wrote:
I used to think quantum physics was awesome until I took a class on it.. Then I realized it was pretty much the standard "here's some equations someone smarter than you derived, manipulate them and do math" type of thing. Also I still have no idea what the conceptual explanation for matrices and eigenvectors are, despite acing the class. To the math purists out there, I'd say that as a non-physics major, the non-math explanations and the pop science I read were both far more engaging and useful than the equations.


Don't they at least show how it was derived? I went to a class on classical mechanics and the whole class was about deriving the formulas.
micronesia
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States24648 Posts
April 01 2013 16:07 GMT
#33
On April 02 2013 01:06 Recognizable wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 01 2013 00:18 iamho wrote:
I used to think quantum physics was awesome until I took a class on it.. Then I realized it was pretty much the standard "here's some equations someone smarter than you derived, manipulate them and do math" type of thing. Also I still have no idea what the conceptual explanation for matrices and eigenvectors are, despite acing the class. To the math purists out there, I'd say that as a non-physics major, the non-math explanations and the pop science I read were both far more engaging and useful than the equations.


Don't they at least show how it was derived? I went to a class on classical mechanics and the whole class was about deriving the formulas.

Well quantum mechanics can's always be derived the way classical mechanics can. For example, the Schrodinger Equation itself was proposed rather than derived.
ModeratorThere are animal crackers for people and there are people crackers for animals.
Recognizable
Profile Blog Joined December 2011
Netherlands1552 Posts
April 01 2013 16:13 GMT
#34
How do you propose an equation on unimaginable things like these?
micronesia
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States24648 Posts
April 01 2013 16:15 GMT
#35
On April 02 2013 01:13 Recognizable wrote:
How do you propose an equation on unimaginable things like these?

I'm not sure how to answer this. They had a pretty good idea of what solutions the Schrodinger equation should give, and how they should behave under some simple situations, I guess. It was just a matter of finding the right differential equation.

Maybe a quantum expert can weigh in more.
ModeratorThere are animal crackers for people and there are people crackers for animals.
Teoita
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
Italy12246 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-04-01 16:52:24
April 01 2013 16:22 GMT
#36
I'm not exactly a quantum physics expert (4th year physics student), but basically what happened was:

Several phenomena such as black body radiation, the Stern-Gerlach experiment, the photoelectric effect etc were explained by hypothesizing the existence of quantum behaviour. This is known as "old" quantum physics, and had no theoretical basis. Rather, it was a collection of ad-hoc assumptions for each experiment.

What Dirac, Heisenberg and Shroedinger did was provide a physical theory that explained all this behaviours. What this means is, they provided some very specific (and abstract) postulates, and then demonstrated that by using these mathematical hypothesis it was possible to model quantum behaviour, that is, to have a mathematical model that explained all these phenomena and was able to predict even more things (which essentially means, contructing a theory in the scientific sense of the word).

If you want to read more, take a look at wikipedia's page, it's pretty ok: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postulate_of_quantum_mechanics
ModeratorProtoss all-ins are like a wok. You can throw whatever you want in there and it will turn out alright.
CoughingHydra
Profile Blog Joined May 2012
177 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-04-01 18:24:06
April 01 2013 17:40 GMT
#37
On April 02 2013 01:15 micronesia wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 02 2013 01:13 Recognizable wrote:
How do you propose an equation on unimaginable things like these?

I'm not sure how to answer this. They had a pretty good idea of what solutions the Schrodinger equation should give, and how they should behave under some simple situations, I guess. It was just a matter of finding the right differential equation.

Maybe a quantum expert can weigh in more.

From what I heard (I'm only a maths student), Feynman uses in his lectures the analogous interpretation of quantum mechanics to the Lagrangian interpretation of classical mechanics. In Lagrangian mechanics, a particle's trajectory is such that the difference between kinetic and potential energy (summarized through time) is minimal. From this you can derive Newton's second law. The analogous interpretation in quantum would be that you look at all possible trajectories and each will give a certain contribution to the final wave function. From this you should be able to get the Schroedinger equation.

EDIT:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics#Mathematically_equivalent_formulations_of_quantum_mechanics

Also, from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schrödinger_equation
Like Newton's Second law, the Schrödinger equation can be mathematically transformed into other formulations such as Werner Heisenberg's matrix mechanics, and Richard Feynman's path integral formulation
Teoita
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
Italy12246 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-04-01 17:50:59
April 01 2013 17:45 GMT
#38
While that is correct, it's also not very precise.

Feynman's formulation of quantum mechanics (which is what you described) is from the 50's ish, it has nothing to do with how it was first written in the 30's.

If you want to be technical, Shroedinger's equation is simply written H |E> = E |E>, and it's a "simple" eigenvalue/eigenvector problem. H is the hamiltonian, |E> is an eigenvector and E the corresponding eigenvalue.
The messy thing of course is figuring out how to write it explicitly when you are finding the eigenvalues and eigenvectors in a spite that has infinite dimensions, and sometimes even continous dimensions (the equations in quantum mechanics are written in l2 spaces for the math students out there).
That's where all the derivatives and such that you see in how it's usually written come in; those are one way to represent the operators present in the Hamiltonian. This was the approach first used by Dirac, Heisenberg and Shroedinger in the 30's.

Feynman simply introduced yet another way of looking at the math framework of quantum physics, which proved extremely valuable in formulating the more "modern" quantum theories, known as quantum field theory (of which i know next to nothing because it's FUCKING COMPLEX SHIT).
ModeratorProtoss all-ins are like a wok. You can throw whatever you want in there and it will turn out alright.
micronesia
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States24648 Posts
April 01 2013 17:54 GMT
#39
I would love to see a 'derivation' of the fundamental postulate of quantum mechanics:

The commutator of position and momentum is i*h_bar
ModeratorThere are animal crackers for people and there are people crackers for animals.
Teoita
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
Italy12246 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-04-01 17:58:49
April 01 2013 17:56 GMT
#40
Well it's a postulate, you can't derive it. You just say "well fuck it it's kinda like classical mechanics. Makes sense" afaik.

edit: unless you talk about crazy shit like string theory or other unified field theories. There -might- be some more general principle from which the quantization postulate comes from, but yeah, not many people would be aware of that and even less would understand wtf is written.
ModeratorProtoss all-ins are like a wok. You can throw whatever you want in there and it will turn out alright.
Prev 1 2 3 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
GSL Code S
09:30
Ro8 - Group A
Rogue vs GuMihoLIVE!
Maru vs Solar
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
ProTech71
EnDerr 36
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 28493
Calm 4207
Rain 1833
Bisu 1009
Pusan 535
Jaedong 490
BeSt 313
TY 284
ToSsGirL 120
EffOrt 108
[ Show more ]
Soulkey 89
PianO 89
Shine 65
Killer 62
sorry 56
Hyun 55
Aegong 48
[sc1f]eonzerg 45
Last 44
NaDa 23
Movie 23
Barracks 20
Sharp 14
HiyA 13
Sacsri 11
Dota 2
XcaliburYe501
BananaSlamJamma425
420jenkins358
Fuzer 223
Counter-Strike
shoxiejesuss808
Stewie2K647
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor145
Other Games
singsing1704
ceh9588
Happy466
Pyrionflax289
crisheroes264
XaKoH 197
Crank 187
DeMusliM72
Organizations
Dota 2
PGL Dota 2 - Secondary Stream5888
Other Games
gamesdonequick346
StarCraft: Brood War
UltimateBattle 39
lovetv 5
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 12 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• iopq 5
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Other Games
• WagamamaTV65
Upcoming Events
Online Event
13h 43m
Replay Cast
15h 43m
GSL Code S
23h 13m
herO vs Zoun
Classic vs Bunny
The PondCast
23h 43m
Replay Cast
1d 13h
WardiTV Invitational
2 days
OSC
2 days
Korean StarCraft League
2 days
SOOP
2 days
CranKy Ducklings
2 days
[ Show More ]
WardiTV Invitational
3 days
Cheesadelphia
3 days
CSO Cup
3 days
GSL Code S
3 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Wardi Open
5 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Replay Cast
5 days
RSL Revival
5 days
Cure vs Percival
ByuN vs Spirit
RSL Revival
6 days
herO vs sOs
Zoun vs Clem
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Season 17: Qualifier 2
BGE Stara Zagora 2025
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
NPSL S3
Rose Open S1
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
2025 GSL S2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025
YaLLa Compass Qatar 2025
PGL Bucharest 2025
BLAST Open Spring 2025

Upcoming

Copa Latinoamericana 4
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
SEL Season 2 Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
HSC XXVII
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.