home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!think.com!news!columbus
- From: columbus@strident.think.com (Michael Weiss)
- Newsgroups: sci.physics
- Subject: The confusion of tongues (was: Trouble understanding bra-ket notation)
- Date: 21 Jan 93 10:14:15
- Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
- Lines: 27
- Distribution: usa
- Message-ID: <COLUMBUS.93Jan21101415@strident.think.com>
- References: <31c31z=@rpi.edu> <1993Jan17.214117.27235@galois.mit.edu>
- <1jd41cINNdh4@gap.caltech.edu> <1jlhucINNrtj@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: strident.think.com
- In-reply-to: ask@ucscb.UCSC.EDU's message of 21 Jan 93 07:04:44 GMT
-
-
- Whitehead said somewhere that progress in mathematics depends not on
- thinking about what you're doing, but in crafting notation that makes you
- to do the right thing without thinking.
-
- Dirac's bra-ket notation fills Whitehead's prescription to the letter.
- Mathematicians seem to prefer a more thought-ful notation, with
- correspondences spelled out. Dirac writes <v|T for the dual of T operating
- on the dual of |v>; glance in a mathematics text and you are apt to find
- T* L_v, or something similar. Again, Dirac writes simply <v|T|w> for
- either side of the equation <v,Tw> = <T*v,w>, thereby saving a step in many
- computations.
-
- On the topic of mathematicians' vs. physicists' notation, does anyone know
- why most mathematicians will write an integral as shown below on the left
- (unless they omit the dummy variable x entirely), whereas physicists prefer
- the form on the right?
-
- / /
- | f(x) dx | dx f(x)
- / /
-
- With the left-hand form, the integral sign and the dx act as delimiters.
- With the right hand form, the combination of integral sign with dx stands
- for a linear operator. Neither interpretation seems to favor one side of
- the cultural divide.
-
-