Comment on Nom nom

blind3rdeye@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

• mellitusgull@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Crocodile want to eat cactus ?

  source

  • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Crocodile needs eat cactus to see window

    source
  • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    That cactus is the devil!

    source
• stebo02@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  arguably, it’s |ψ〉, which is not the same as >

  source

  • TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    wow that’s a big difference (I have no idea what you are talking about)

    source

    • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I think 〉 means a very hungry (or at least large mouthed) crocodile, and > is just a normal one.

      source
    • stebo02@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      It is just a notation for linear algebra and linear operators on complex vector spaces together with their dual space both in the finite-dimensional and infinite-dimensional case. Really quite simple stuff actually…

      source

      • TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        smiles and nods, smiles and nods…

        source
• Kichae@lemmy.ca ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  No? Not everyone’s doing work on quantum systems. Far from it. Most people do not need to use Dirac notation.

  source

  • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I guess not. Its just that when I hear ‘theoretical physics’ I immediately think of particle physics (and related fields). I have this idea that in most branches of physics people just say the topic, eg. astronomy, material sciences, or whatever; and don’t usually specify whether they are doing theoretical work or experimental/empirical work. But in particle physics … my impression is that people are more likely to specify. Anyway, that’s just my own bias I guess.

    source