Serving the Quantitative Finance Community

 
User avatar
katastrofa
Posts: 7440
Joined: August 16th, 2007, 5:36 am
Location: Alpha Centauri

Re: a math point on wave function

January 17th, 2017, 9:16 pm

List1, have you heard about Wigner function?
 
User avatar
list1
Topic Author
Posts: 827
Joined: July 22nd, 2015, 2:12 pm

Re: a math point on wave function

January 17th, 2017, 9:52 pm

List1, have you heard about Wigner function
It is a Wigner function and Wigner distribution which somewhat different. Both of them seem do not specify quantum particle path.
 
User avatar
Cuchulainn
Posts: 20254
Joined: July 16th, 2004, 7:38 am
Location: 20, 000

Re: a math point on wave function

January 18th, 2017, 10:11 am

More detailed paper 

Is it not an idea to use Latex?
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 2572
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm
Contact:

Re: a math point on wave function

January 18th, 2017, 4:07 pm

List1, have you heard about Wigner function?
Don't forget to include negative quasi probabilities 

We review some of the literature on negative probabilities in physics fo- cussing primarily on the Wigner function 

God does not play dice with negative probabilities!! Only humans and humanoids do (or possibly only humanoids)!
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 2572
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm
Contact:

Re: a math point on wave function

January 18th, 2017, 4:28 pm

More detailed paper 

Is it not an idea to use Latex?
I tried to use the Equation Editor in Microsoft Word  years ago and hated it. It was hard to use and produced ugly output. I tried it again recently and was pleasantly surprised.

I’ve long said that math written in Word is ugly, and it usually is. But the fault lies with users, like myself, not with Word. I realize now that the problem is that most people writing math in Word are not using the Equation Editor
I personally prefer typing in LaTeX, in particlular longer documents. If using word one should use MathType or the Equation Editor 3.0 and avoid Microsoft Math Editor I think, in particular if for print. Mirosoft Math editor supposedly can give problems with high resolution.
 
User avatar
list1
Topic Author
Posts: 827
Joined: July 22nd, 2015, 2:12 pm

Re: a math point on wave function

January 18th, 2017, 6:17 pm

List1, have you heard about Wigner function?
Don't forget to include negative quasi probabilities 

We review some of the literature on negative probabilities in physics fo- cussing primarily on the Wigner function 

God does not play dice with negative probabilities!! Only humans and humanoids do (or possibly only humanoids)!
In formal construction of the wave function they deal with the classical probabilities and the probabilistic measure corresponding random process that is underlying of the wave function is a complex-valued process. All difficulties have arisen in the Feynman's approach connected to attempts to construct probabilistic measure of the wave's underlying in real-valued world. Formal construction suggests that Feynman construction deal with 'trace" or might be better say a projection of the complex quantum movement on real part of the complex-value quant world.
 
User avatar
Cuchulainn
Posts: 20254
Joined: July 16th, 2004, 7:38 am
Location: 20, 000

Re: a math point on wave function

January 20th, 2017, 11:49 am

More detailed paper 

Is it not an idea to use Latex?
I tried to use the Equation Editor in Microsoft Word  years ago and hated it. It was hard to use and produced ugly output. I tried it again recently and was pleasantly surprised.

I’ve long said that math written in Word is ugly, and it usually is. But the fault lies with users, like myself, not with Word. I realize now that the problem is that most people writing math in Word are not using the Equation Editor
I personally prefer typing in LaTeX, in particlular longer documents. If using word one should use MathType or the Equation Editor 3.0 and avoid Microsoft Math Editor I think, in particular if for print. Mirosoft Math editor supposedly can give problems with high resolution.
I usually turn the switch off if I see an article that is not in Latex.  This is not always possible. e.g. having to read a thesis.. it's like walking in melting snow.
 
User avatar
Cuchulainn
Posts: 20254
Joined: July 16th, 2004, 7:38 am
Location: 20, 000

Re: a math point on wave function

January 20th, 2017, 11:50 am

List1, have you heard about Wigner function?
Don't forget to include negative quasi probabilities 

We review some of the literature on negative probabilities in physics fo- cussing primarily on the Wigner function 

God does not play dice with negative probabilities!! Only humans and humanoids do (or possibly only humanoids)!
You like your negative probabilities, so you do :)
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 2572
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm
Contact:

Re: a math point on wave function

January 21st, 2017, 5:57 pm

List1, have you heard about Wigner function?
Don't forget to include negative quasi probabilities 

We review some of the literature on negative probabilities in physics fo- cussing primarily on the Wigner function 

God does not play dice with negative probabilities!! Only humans and humanoids do (or possibly only humanoids)!
You like your negative probabilities, so you do :)
they love me, and I admit I felt in love with them for a short while. That was until I found out how complex and negative they truly are!
 
User avatar
Cuchulainn
Posts: 20254
Joined: July 16th, 2004, 7:38 am
Location: 20, 000

Re: a math point on wave function

January 21st, 2017, 6:26 pm

Don't forget to include negative quasi probabilities 

We review some of the literature on negative probabilities in physics fo- cussing primarily on the Wigner function 

God does not play dice with negative probabilities!! Only humans and humanoids do (or possibly only humanoids)!
You like your negative probabilities, so you do :)
they love me, and I admit I felt in love with them for a short while. That was until I found out how complex and negative they truly are!
Two negatives don't make a positive.
 
User avatar
Traden4Alpha
Posts: 3300
Joined: September 20th, 2002, 8:30 pm

Re: a math point on wave function

January 21st, 2017, 10:50 pm

You like your negative probabilities, so you do :)
they love me, and I admit I felt in love with them for a short while. That was until I found out how complex and negative they truly are!
Two negatives don't make a positive.
Under multiplication they do!