MIT 8.04 Quantum Physics I, Spring 2016 View the complete course: ocw.mit.edu/8-0... Instructor: Barton Zwiebach License: Creative Commons BY-NC-SA More information at ocw.mit.edu/terms More courses at ocw.mit.edu
Professor is so cool...he explains everything with patience and...best part is that he carries proof...MIT stands apart from the rest of universities around the world...I miss studying in this university ...buut any ways seems to have a substitute..love you MIT but you may not ....but i love you anyways:-)
He teaches nothing that you can't get exactly the same way at any other university in a Western country. Physics undergrad education is pretty much the same all over the developed world. If there is a working restroom in the building, then this is what you get in QM101. Your problem is that you don't even have a working restroom. :-)
Excellent. Wished his lectures were available when I was I was an undergrad. p/s Professor Zweich does look a bit like Harrison Ford without his glasses on!
@@michaelcordova1803 al buscarlo pensé que iba a ser de esos latinos criados en EEUU, pero es nacido y criado en el Perú. Que bueno que hay gente que independiente de donde venga logré grandes cosas.
He is talking about the exponential but the wavefunction Ψ is the the integral of these exponentials times a function Φ Note that Ψ is an eigenstate of the p operator (p hat) only if Φ peaks narrowly around a certain value (the eigenvalue being p of course)
My only qualm is that Ehat operator is actually defined as ihbar d/dt. In this case, with no potential energy it in fact is equal to the energy operator. With potential total energy would not just equal kinetic, so the way we defined the energy would not be an eigenstate of the energy operator, which defeats the our purpose of the operator.
Given the relation (operator -> observable). If you have a decomposition of the observable, its operator is also a decomposition of other operators. The potential occurs if you find a scalar field that satifies a gradient equation, so in a big sense, defining the energy operator as a composition of potential operator is more general that thinking of a composition of potential operator plus a potential operator.
Yeah I reacted to this part as well, he says a couple of times that the p^2 is the "energy operator" but conceptually I think it helps to think of it in reverse - p^2 is just, to start with, the "p^2 operator" and the *physics* of the particle in this situation that you already have (E=p^2/m) tells you that this operator operating on the wavefunction should give the same result as the energy operator operating on the wavefunction that was previously defined.
Schroedinger's equation is unphysical, so you can't "derive" it from rational first principles. Not sure what you think you are doing, but it is certainly not a "derivation".
It's cool that they actually show the students in the front at the beginning of the video. I've been wondering for a while whether he was actually talking just in an empty room in front of a camera or if it was an actual lecture with students there the whole time.
