Interesting. I am slowly building a computer science dictionary with a similar concept: three levels of difficulty https://cs.quickref.dev/
That's very cool!
Physics Travel Guide – Physics concepts explained in three levels of difficulty
21–30 of 38 posts
Re: Physics Travel Guide – Physics concepts explained in three levels of difficulty
#22Cool article!
Re: Physics Travel Guide – Physics concepts explained in three levels of difficulty
#23From just glancing at a few articles, this site is a treasure trove of references to highly readable explanations on a variety of fairly advanced topics. In fact, just the links to Wilczek's grand unification overview [1], and Klauber's Student Friendly QFT book [2,3] made this site worth visiting for me.
Resources that explain physics in (relatively) simple language without requiring books worth of prior knowledge seem to always be targeted at school-level physics; this one is different.
Of course, this is no substitute for a university curriculum, but as a way to plug holes in one's understanding, the site seems genuinely high quality.
[1] http://frankwilczek.com/Wilczek_Easy_Pieces/172_Unification_...
[2] https://www.quantumfieldtheory.info/
[3] ftp://srdconsulting.com/USB_BackUp/Data/Articles/QFT/StudentFriendlyQFT/
Re: Physics Travel Guide – Physics concepts explained in three levels of difficulty
#24Almost nothing about experiments. Physics is an experimental science, based on observation of nature. Its treatments of experiments is as if they were mere side notes to the real thing. The Tools section might include something like a ruler, clock, or basic physical tools used to observe nature with.
Huh. The first thing I opened was Aharanov-Bohm which immediately describes an experimental setup.
Re: Physics Travel Guide – Physics concepts explained in three levels of difficulty
#25Some of those articles are just a modern Tantra - no one is seriously trying to refute these models because lots of people have a comfortable, high social status living out of it, just like modern theologians or tibetologists - they know the mantras and it's current interpretations, and the question of "How real it is" is frowned upon. Generalisations aside (however valid and useful) most of this theoretical physics…
> Some of those articles are just a modern Tantra
Would you care to provide concrete examples?
> Generalisations aside (however valid and useful) most of this theoretical physics is nothing but a socially constructed models, agreed upon.
Well, of course. Theories are formal systems that we construct to be a "looking glass" of the results of observations and experiments.
Re: Physics Travel Guide – Physics concepts explained in three levels of difficulty
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that you jonathan tooker?
Before Hegel and his abstract bullshit, the main question of philosophy was "What is real", not what a mind can imagine. Similarly, the main question of physics used to be "how everything is", not how do we think everything might be. A map is not a territory, a model is not what is. It is that simple and infallible.
So, are you a model of Jonathan Tooker, or are we encountering the real deal here?
Re: Physics Travel Guide – Physics concepts explained in three levels of difficulty
#27No Special or General Relativity - WTF? OK found them hidden away under "models" - WTF again?
General relativity is (sort of) a classical field theory; it isn't crazy to put it under models, in the same way that QFT is under 'theory' but the standard model is under 'models'.
Re: Physics Travel Guide – Physics concepts explained in three levels of difficulty
#28I found this section confusing (emphasis mine):
https://physicstravelguide.com/equations/schroedinger_equati...
"This means that for all systems where the Hamiltonian does not explicitly depend on the time, we known (sic) immediately how the time-dependence of the total wave function Ψ(x,t) looks like (sic), namely: Ψ(x,t) = phi(t)ψ(x) = Ae^(−Et/ℏ)ψ(x). The only thing we then have to do is to solve the stationary Schrödinger equation Hψ(x) = Eψ(x)."
It sounds like they're saying that all systems with a time-independent Hamiltonian are stationary, which is obviously wrong. This would have confused the hell out of me while learning QM, and dissuades me from learning more on this site.
Have I misread? I can infer what they're trying to say from context and previous knowledge, but that's of little help for someone new.
Re: Physics Travel Guide – Physics concepts explained in three levels of difficulty
#29Just looking around, but this looks like a gold mine ! Definitely going to be my go to site when I'm bored ! I love how each concepts are explained at high school, college, and grad school levels !
Re: Physics Travel Guide – Physics concepts explained in three levels of difficulty
#30I found this section confusing (emphasis mine): https://physicstravelguide.com/equations/schroedinger_equati... "This means that for all systems where the Hamiltonian does not explicitly depend on the time, we known (sic) immediately how the time-dependence of the total wave function Ψ(x,t) looks like (sic), namely: Ψ(x,t) = phi(t)ψ(x) = Ae^(−Et/ℏ)ψ(x). The only thing we then have to do is to solve the stationary Sch…
You have misread slightly I fear. Note that he says:
>the stationary Schrödinger equation Hψ(x) = Eψ(x)."
which is not the original Schrödinger equation, but a Schrödinger equation which is stationary and which forms part of the solution of the original Schrödinger equation.