May
7
comment Schrödinger Kernels on manifolds
It's a good place to start for me. Thank you very much!
Apr
30
comment Schrödinger Kernels on manifolds
@WillieWong I know that it's an extremely old answer, but could you please give a reference for the sphere result?
Apr
6
awarded Good Answer
Apr
5
awarded Yearling
Apr
5
awarded Yearling
Apr
5
awarded Nice Answer
Apr
5
awarded Teacher
Apr
5
answered Theorems that impeded progress
Mar
13
awarded Student
Mar
12
asked Simple MIDI/trigger pedals
Mar
6
awarded Curious
Mar
6
comment Localization of solutions for time-dependent Schroedinger equation
@ChristianRemling I think that the RAGE theorem is not what I'm looking for exactly, since I am interested to see that the solution "does not interact" with the potential under some conditions, which seems more reasonable for small times. But I will have a closer look, thank you. And yes $\langle \psi,x \psi\rangle$ is perfectly reasonable =) I just don't think that it captures this idea of locality
Mar
6
comment Localization of solutions for time-dependent Schroedinger equation
I edited slightly the question. Basically I would like to see that as long as the particle is far away from the barrier, it does not "see it", which means that there is some property of some particular solution that holds independently of the potential, but maybe just for small times. @KonstantinosKanakoglou L^2-norm is perfectly fine, any observable would do fine as long as it remains finite for small times. I was trying to prove this result for some weighted norms or for averages of some simple compactly supported observables, but I was not able too.
Mar
6
revised Localization of solutions for time-dependent Schroedinger equation
added 100 characters in body
Mar
5
asked Localization of solutions for time-dependent Schroedinger equation
Jan
28
asked Inductive limits of unitary groups and quantum mechanics
Jan
28
comment Closed form solutions for maximal subsets of convex polytopes
Sorry for disappearing =) Yes, I've tried this one immediately, but the problem is that I had a simplex defined by the position of its vertices. Or to be more precise I had a family of convex bodies in $\mathbb{R}^n$ parameterized in $\mathbb{R}^n$ and the idea was to try to approximate it by a ball and see how big this ball can get when $n$ goes to infinity (hoping that it would be infinite, which turned out to be not always the case). I could generate as many points as I wanted to create a simplex, but recalculating them using plane representation for all n seemed like too many computations
Jan
28
accepted Closed form solutions for maximal subsets of convex polytopes
2018
Nov
28
comment Closed form solutions for maximal subsets of convex polytopes
Yes, please. You can even post it as an answer, if you want. I don't think that someone else is going to answer.
Nov
27
comment Closed form solutions for maximal subsets of convex polytopes
Could you please give some references?
1 2 3