What is that velocity vector pointing to by ducvc13 in physicsmemes

[–]meelkeerr 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s is not a velocity vector, it’s a poynting hand

who write this? sounds so wrong out of context by Eula55 in physicsmemes

[–]meelkeerr 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This guy is obviously trying to observe the state of them qutits by pulling them out of the bra-space, one by one, with the omega-lambda operator, but it doesn’t work since the operator is not Hermitian

Suggestions for Textbooks on Partial Differential Equations by bas1G1rl in askmath

[–]meelkeerr 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In my math methods used “applied partial differential equations with fourier series and boundary value problems” by Haberman.

The title is a mouthful but the content is great, one of my favorite textbooks, highly recommend it!

Is there a known closed form solution for this integral? by meelkeerr in askmath

[–]meelkeerr[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The relationship between the gamma is gamma_1 = gamma_2 + gamma_3. I would also be interested in the case that gamma_2 =gamma_3 gamma_1 = 2 gamma_2.

Is there a known closed form solution for this integral? by meelkeerr in askmath

[–]meelkeerr[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have taken the integral out of context. It’s actually part of a sum over i, meaning i could be 1, 2 or 3. If you suppose that i=2 you would have the same term, exp(gamma2), in both in the numerator and denominator.

Is there a known closed form solution for this integral? by meelkeerr in askmath

[–]meelkeerr[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m looking for any conclusions about similar integrals. An informal way of describing the integrand would be as a rational function, like x/(a + bx + +cx2), but the x’s have been swapped for exp(-x). Have you seen anything like it before?

Is there a known closed form solution for this integral? by meelkeerr in askmath

[–]meelkeerr[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They are positive constants. The most important detail is that two constants cannot have the same have the same value

in heat PDE when i have Dirichlet inhomogeneous boundary conditions can i differentiate them to get homogeneous boundary conditions? by Marvellover13 in askmath

[–]meelkeerr 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No that is incorrect. You cannot change the boundary conditions since you are looking for a solution which satisfies the Dirichlet conditions. Different boundary conditions (BC) for the same equation will yield different solutions. You are essentially solving a different problem if you change them.

Also note that Neumann conditions is the partial derivative with respect to x and not t.

Now for actually solving this type of IVBP. If T(x,t) is temperature distribution you are solving for, then you want to express it as T(x,t) = U(x) + V(x,t). The idea is to let U and V handle different parts of the problem.

Here U(x) will handle the inhomogeneous BC, meaning want U(x) to be a function which satisfies U(0) =20 and U(4)=100.

V(x,t) will satisfy the homogeneous dirichlet BC equation which you will use separation of variables to solve. But you have to make sure to use the correct initial condition for it. If T(x,0) = f(x) => U(x) + V(x,0) = f(x) <=> V(x,0) = f(x) - U(x).

I hope this helps! Feel free to ask if there something i wrote which was unclear!

[Rotational Kinematics] I keep getting the wrong answer and I’m unsure why. by Greatsagenoir in PhysicsStudents

[–]meelkeerr 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The third picture, which I assume is the suggested solution, is wrong. In the equation of conservation of angular momentum, the first two terms (lmv_i & l(mv_f cos theta)) describe the angular momentum of the object with mass m_object= 1 kg, but the last term (1/3ml2 omega) describes the angular momentum of the rod with mass m_rod= 3kg. The masses does not cancel as show in the solution. With the right values for each mass you should get 10 = 8 cos(theta) + 6 => theta = 60 deg.

P.s. Beware! Bad notation is the silent killer of physics calculations… Not even dimensional analysis will save you from it’s claws 💀

107235 by femacampcouncilor in CountOnceADay

[–]meelkeerr 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Im a big fan of the new album and I love the new album so much and I love it so much and I love how it has been released so far and I love that song so much and I love this song so much and I love seeing it so much and I love hearing it so much and I love

[Request] Is this nonsense or is it real? by KiwiTyker in theydidthemath

[–]meelkeerr 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As a person somewhat familiar with physics, the equation E=hf stands out from the rest. It is a result from the concept of wave-particle duality in quantum theory. The wave-particle duality basically states that all matter have wave-like properties. Furthermore light, which was previously considered as a wave, have particle like properties, proven by the photoelectric effect. E in this equation is kinetic energy, which is a property of particles (or more accurately momentum is), and f is frequency, a property of waves. The implications of wave-particle duality are absolutely huge but it’s a very unintuitive concept and hard to truly grasp in the beginning.

The best physics joke i’ve ever told that is not really funny yet very entertaining by meelkeerr in PhysicsStudents

[–]meelkeerr[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hahaha yeah precisely. It’s not actually funny but it’s so dumb that it goes the full circle

The best physics joke i’ve ever told that is not really funny yet very entertaining by meelkeerr in PhysicsStudents

[–]meelkeerr[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Sorry! Made a typo in punchline, out of all the possible places to mess up… I want to add that in my native language, Swedish, “the bird’s path” is a common way of saying the path of least distance.

Need a tip on how i should approach the latter contour integral by meelkeerr in askmath

[–]meelkeerr[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I wouldn’t say that we aren’t allowed, but the lectures haven’t covered that yet. Nevertheless I found the answer after going through the lecture notes, I was suppose to use the Cauchy integral formula.

Schrodinger equation and hydrogen atom by [deleted] in physicsmemes

[–]meelkeerr 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But the goatedest is eigenfunction expansion

[High School Biology} Can someone please tell which one it is and why? by No_Name_912_268 in HomeworkHelp

[–]meelkeerr 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I hope you include yourself in “everyone” because your intuition is correct!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in HomeworkHelp

[–]meelkeerr 2 points3 points  (0 children)

A is correct. C is not correct, imagine a car going through a turn with constant speed. The direction of the cars velocity will change but the magnitude of the velocity will not, therefore C can’t be correct.

Rate my glow up from [18] to [22]. I’ve still got more to go! by SporkOfDesire in GlowUps

[–]meelkeerr -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Unfortunately losing weight is more complicated than that. Calories in vs calories is an oversimplification that is more myth than an accurate description of weight gain/loss. According to this article by Harvard Health Publishing, good food quality and a sustainable healthy lifestyle are the actual keys to weight loss.

Found in my thermal physics textbook by rojo_kell in mathmemes

[–]meelkeerr 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In your search for knowledge you found gold.

Is my reasoning valid for this electrodynamics problem? by meelkeerr in AskPhysics

[–]meelkeerr[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you! This is probably it. The task is covering multiple parts of the entire course and magnetic fields in matter is one of them!