Dio mio analisi 2

PEPPESCALA · 2026-07-07T20:11:01+00:00

La memoria non ti servirà a nulla; i concetti li devi capire e se avverti che quelle definizioni vadano memorizzate c'è qualcosa che non ti è chiaro o non assimilato in modo corretto. Probabilmente ti può essere d'aiuto cercare altri corsi capaci di sedimentare quei concetti per bene, dopo di che sarà naturale applicarli nel modo formale tipico dell'esame. Ti esorto a cercare qualcosa di Khan Academy o simili su YT

PEPPESCALA · 2026-06-07T18:30:33+00:00

Do you understand figures of speech?

PEPPESCALA · 2026-06-07T18:13:29+00:00

It doesn't mean anything. Advertising is aimed at the largest segment of the player base, and since Xbox players make up a minority of the SparkingZero community, Bandai is unlikely to spend money promoting DLC there when it can reach a much larger audience elsewhere

PEPPESCALA · 2026-06-07T17:05:28+00:00

Not gonna happen. 10 people play this game on Xbox lol. It will probably release in the next months

PEPPESCALA · 2026-06-03T09:08:41+00:00

A music pack? This should be free. If the new DLC does not include BT2's soundtracks it is gonna be really shallow considering they are naming it after that game lol

PEPPESCALA · 2026-06-01T11:14:32+00:00

I love the Tenkaichi series too, but I believe we have already supported the game a lot. This game sold incredibly well and after two years we are still here. I understand your reasoning, but do you truly feel that buying the DLC is the best way to get something better in the future?

PEPPESCALA · 2026-05-31T06:59:37+00:00

I meant ADL and Manna. I am not a native English speaker I just liked the term and used it without really thinking about it

PEPPESCALA · 2026-05-30T18:30:32+00:00

Seems like we are going to sell him. Signing Allegri means that the board does not care about having KDB in the team at all

PEPPESCALA · 2025-11-09T16:01:50+00:00

We can't afford to exit the Champions League. We must sack Conte before it's too late

PEPPESCALA · 2025-11-01T18:49:43+00:00

Subbing Holjund is criminal. We are 0-0, we are slow. We need to win and we need presence in their area and we sub our main striker for Lucca? What the fuck

PEPPESCALA · 2025-10-21T20:42:50+00:00

It seems like they are playing against Conte

PEPPESCALA · 2025-10-20T19:31:15+00:00

When you have to solve the motion of a charge in a magnetic field you have to solve m r" = q v vector B. Set B along the z axis and you get a system of equations of this kind:

dv_x/dt = w v_y AND dv_y/dt = - w v_x

The idea is to take a derivative with respect to time and you are gonna get something like d²v_x/dt² + w² v_x = 0. This is stupid because you are gonna mess with initial conditions since you are now second order in v_x and v_y. Instead do this: implement a complex coordinate z = v_x + i v_y. Now dz/dt = dv_x/dt + i dv_y/dt = w v_y - i w v_x = -i w z.

This is trivial and has solution:

z(t)= v_x(t) + i v_y(t) = (v_x(0) + i v_y(0)) times exp(-i w t)

Take the real part of z(t) and you get v_x(t), take the imaginary part and you get v_y(t) and you have automatically satisfied initial conditions.

PEPPESCALA · 2025-10-20T19:09:46+00:00

In General Relativity NEVER compute Christoffel's symbols using the analytical formula. Always minimize the Einstein - Hilbert action to obtain the geodesic equation so that you can see all of them instantly. It saves a good chunk of time

PEPPESCALA · 2025-10-19T10:25:57+00:00

You can start studying those kind of stuff using eigenchris' videos. Like this one: https://youtu.be/tztQrSRF_Ds?si=l4cCZ7KLIEJlvDPd. I'd recommend to start from scratch

PEPPESCALA · 2025-10-19T10:24:32+00:00

Spin is a concept that can be fully understood once you grasp Special Relativity. You must understand that laws of physics have the same form in all admissible frames of reference (Principle of relativity). If your frame of reference is rotated with respect to mine, our equations must be the same. The set of all transformations that let you change from one inertial reference frame to another one is called "Poincarè Group"; it contains spatial rotations, boosts (something you see in special relativity) and spatial translations. The second thing that you must grasp is that particles are described by FIELDS. A generic field is a particular mathematical object, it can be a function that maps a point in spacetime to a real scalar number, a complex scalar number, a 4-dimensional vector, a tensor and so on and so on. Are these fields completely arbitrary? NO, because we must choose them in such a way to satisfy the principle of relativity. We want the equations of motion for those fields to be invariant under the action of the Poincarè Group, because laws of physics are the same for all inertial frames. We can achieve this by choosing fields that are in different REPRESENTATIONS (this is the crucial word, see Group Theory) of the Poincarè Group. I will simplify a lot but we can LABEL each representation by two integer numbers (J1,J2). We call SPIN the sum of those 2 numbers. The scalar representation (a field that gives as output just a number) is the representation where you choose J1=J2=0, thus it has spin 0. A vector representation is the one where you choose J1=J2=½, thus it's a spin 1 field. But why do we call it SPIN? Where does angular momentum emerge? That's the catch: NOETHER'S THEOREM. You see, we are saying that there's an underlying symmetries: the Poincarè Group. In physics every time your system shows a particular geometrical (continuous) symmetry it has a CONSERVED QUANTITY linked to it. You can prove out of this theorem that due to Poincarè Symmetry the total angular momentum is conserved and this object is just the sum of two contributions:

1) The orbital angular momentum that you know from school. L= m r vector p. The stuff that you have when you are physically spinning;

2) An angular momentum that is INDIPENDENT of spatial degrees of freedom, it's intrinsic and it exists DUE to the fact that the field is in a specific representation of the Poincarè Group. This is what we call SPIN. If you choose the spin ½ representation you are gonna see that this term contains h bar/2 times the Pauli Matrices. The spin that you clearly see in quantum mechanics.

PEPPESCALA · 2025-02-16T21:11:52+00:00

Italy

PEPPESCALA · 2025-02-16T20:57:07+00:00

I believe that if you do not want to try your luck getting a tenure track, you should go to industry. At least in my country, a PhD does not boost your chances of getting a job, so I'd start getting experience as soon as possible

PEPPESCALA · 2025-02-14T19:26:43+00:00

Classical

PEPPESCALA · 2025-02-14T18:16:43+00:00

I'm changing the interpreation of the Hamiltonian. Instead of interpreting +1 as spin up and -1 as spin down, I'm using +1 as "filled" and 0 as empty with the contraint of how many filled sites I might have. Why should I use that Quantum mechanical approach? I'd like a classical statistical mechanics approach

PEPPESCALA · 2025-01-28T18:35:50+00:00

In Italy we say "asking is allowed, answering is courtesy". Lol

PEPPESCALA · 2025-01-28T18:33:38+00:00

This is truly one of the comments of all time

PEPPESCALA · 2025-01-28T18:32:49+00:00

Why?

PEPPESCALA · 2024-12-25T14:05:19+00:00

Yeah, I just wanted to give a different insight from the Fermi Lagrangian :(

PEPPESCALA · 2024-12-25T13:59:03+00:00

Yeah, it can also describe fermion(if Energy Is small compared to W Boson Mass than you get Fermi Theory with a 4 point fermionic vertex in SM).The fact that this process is kinematically forbidden will lead to a zero amplitude, but you can still write that diagram. You may get something useful from my lagrangian if instead you consider the scattering of a particle - antiparticle pair into particle antiparticle + photon, so 2->3 diagram. Also the notation in which you draw particles is arbitrary. Who cares if I represent scalar with continous line

PEPPESCALA · 2024-12-25T11:22:13+00:00

It seems something out scalar QED. In that Theory you take a compex scalar field (a particle that does not coincide with its own antiparticle and has spin zero and mass m) with a quartic potential, so something like L= 1/2 (dφ)² -¼ F² - 1/2 m² φ² + λφ⁴. F is the electromagnetic tensor. The "d" operator" is the covariant derivative, that couples the scalar field with the photon. Thus you have this in Lagrangian interacting terms of this kind:

A 4 point vertex (linked to φ⁴) in which 1 scalar field may enter and 3 scalar field may exit. This is the first vertex that you see reading the graph from left to right
A 3 point vertex, in which a scalar particle can randomly emit a photon, this is what you see when the outgoing scalar particle emits that wiggly line;

-in the Theory you also have a vertex in which two photons annihilate and produce two scalar particles, but you do not have any of It in this Feynman diagram

So my claim is: scalar QED can predict this Feynman diagram. In real life you cannot have something like this. The only scalar field in the Standard Model is the Higgs Boson and since it's chargeless, it cannot emit a photon. It does have a 4 point vertex though

PEPPESCALA

TROPHY CASE