Saturday, December 2, 2017

logical deduction - The heaviest orange




You have a basket of 9 oranges, 8 of the oranges have the same weight and 1 is heavier than the others. All the oranges looks and feels the same. You have a scale but you are allowed to use it only 2 times. How could you find the heaviest orange?



Answer



Split the nine oranges into



Three piles of three, piles A, B, and C.



Compare the weights of



Piles A and B. If they weigh the same, the heavy orange is in pile C. If either of those two piles are heavier, the heavy orange is in that pile.




Then, compare the weights of



Two of the oranges from the heavier pile. If they're the same, then the third orange is the heaviest. If either of those two are heavier, then that's the heaviest orange.



Note:
There are already several puzzles about very similar weighing problems on Puzzling SE, so don't be too surprised if this question doesn't get a ton of positive feedback or is flagged as a duplicate. Don't take it personally, but in the future remember to look at similar questions to make sure it hasn't been asked before.


mathematics - Does the drunk man fall off the cliff? (a random walk problem)


A drunk man stands with a cliff one step to his left. He takes steps randomly left and right. Each step has probability $p$ of going left and probability $q=1-p$ of going right. Each step is the same size.


If allowed to randomly step indefinitely, what is the probability that the drunk falls off the cliff?



In purely mathematical terms, the drunkard starts at $x=0$ and steps $+1$ or $-1$ with each step. If he ever gets to $x=-1$ he falls off the cliff.



Answer



First, let's consider a modified problem. Suppose that the position of the cliff is moved from $x=-1$ to $x=a$ for some integer $a<0$. Suppose also that the drunkard has a home at $x=b$ for some integer $b>0$, and that if the drunkard reaches his home, he stops walking. Let $d(x)= d_{a,b}(x)$ be the probability the drunkard falls of the cliff, given that the drunkard is at position $x$. We have a recurrence relation $$ d(x)=p\,d(x-1)+(1-p)\,d(x+1). $$ The characteristic polynomial of this recurrence is $(1-p)r^2-r+p$. If we assume $p\neq\frac{1}{2}$, this polynomial has two distinct roots: $$ r=1,\hspace{1cm} r=\frac{p}{1-p}. $$ This means that $d(x)$ has the form $$ d(x)=c_1+c_2\left(\frac{p}{1-p}\right)^x, $$ where $c_1$ and $c_2$ are constants which may depend on $a$, $b$, and $p$ but are independent of $x$. We have boundary conditions $d(a)=1$ and $d(b)=0$, so we can solve for $c_1$ and $c_2$: $$ c_1=\frac{1}{1-\left(\frac{p}{1-p}\right)^{a-b}},\,\,\,c_2=\frac{1}{\left(\frac{p}{1-p}\right)^a-\left(\frac{p}{1-p}\right)^b}. $$




We recover the original question by taking $x=0$, $a=-1$, and letting $b$ go to infinity. The probability the drunkard falls in the original question is $$ \begin{align*} \lim_{b\to\infty} d_{-1,b}(0)&=\lim_{b\to\infty}\frac{1}{1-\left(\frac{p}{1-p}\right)^{-1-b}}+\frac{1}{\left(\frac{p}{1-p}\right)^{-1}-\left(\frac{p}{1-p}\right)^b}\left(\frac{p}{1-p}\right)^0\\ &=\lim_{b\to\infty}\frac{\left(\frac{p}{1-p}\right)^b-1}{\left(\frac{p}{1-p}\right)^b-\frac{1-p}{p}}\\ &=\begin{cases}1:p>\frac{1}{2},\\\frac{p}{1-p}:p<\frac{1}{2}.\end{cases} \end{align*} $$ Since the probability of falling approaches $1$ as $p$ approaches $\frac{1}{2}$ from below, the probability of falling must be $1$ when $p=\frac{1}{2}$.


optics - Why does light refract?


I had read that light does slow down in glass because photons interact with atoms in glass. They are absorbed and re-emitted and during this phenomenon it's speed decreases. See also this and this Phys.SE post and links therein.



But then why does it bend? It has confused me a lot! Furthermore i have very little knowledge of Optics or Physics as a whole.




quantum mechanics - Expansion coefficients of an arbitrary state in the Hilbert space of one-particle states


I was going through my notes on the unitary irreducible representations of the Poincare group and the subsequent construction of one particle states and I stumbled across the following steps in the method of induced representations: ($\mathscr{H}$ is the Hilbert space and $\mathscr{H}_p$ is the subspace of one-particle states with momenta p. $\mathcal{S}_k$ is just the little group of the standard momentum $k$. $L(p)$ is the standard Lorentz boost; $L(p)k=p$)


(1) Let $|k,\sigma\rangle$ be a basis for $\mathscr{H}_k$ and let $\mathcal{D}$ be the (finite) unitary irrep of $\mathcal{S}_k$ induced by the unitary irrep $\mathcal{U}$. Then $\mathcal{D}$ acts on $\mathscr{H}_k$ by mixing the spin polarization states, \begin{align} \mathcal{U}(h)|k,\sigma\rangle=\sum_{\sigma'}\mathcal{D}_{\sigma'\sigma}(h)|k,\sigma'\rangle,~~~ \forall h\in\mathcal{S}_k,~~~\mathcal{U}(h)\equiv\mathcal{U}(h,0). \end{align} (2) Define the basis for $\mathscr{H}_p$ by \begin{align} |p,\sigma\rangle=\mathcal{U}(L(p))|k,\sigma\rangle. \end{align} (3) The action of Lorentz transformations on these states is then \begin{align} \mathcal{U}(\Lambda)|p,\sigma\rangle=\sum_{\sigma'}\mathcal{D}_{\sigma'\sigma}\big(h(\Lambda,p)\big)|\Lambda p,\sigma'\rangle \end{align} where $h(\Lambda,p)=L^{-1}(\Lambda p)\Lambda L(p)\in \mathcal{S}_k$ is known as the Wigner rotation.


(4) Finally, we extend this action to an arbitrary state in the Hilbert space $|\Psi\rangle=\sum_{p,\sigma}\Psi_{\sigma}(p)|p,\sigma\rangle\in\mathscr{H}$ for some coefficients $\Psi_{\sigma}(p)$ by, \begin{align} \mathcal{U}(\Lambda)|\Psi\rangle&=\sum_{p,\sigma}\big[\mathcal{U}(\Lambda)\cdot\Psi\big]_{\sigma}\big( p\big)| p,\sigma\rangle,\notag\\ \text{ where } \big[\mathcal{U}(\Lambda)\cdot\Psi\big]_{\sigma}\big(p\big)&=\sum_{\sigma'}\mathcal{D}_{\sigma\sigma'}\big(h(\Lambda,\Lambda^{-1}p)\big)\Psi_{\sigma'}(\Lambda^{-1}p). \end{align}


These are my own notes which are largely influenced by Weinbergs construction, so they may be incorrect. I understand all of the steps except for one part of step 4; The part where I say $|\Psi\rangle=\sum_{p,\sigma}\Psi_{\sigma}(p)|p,\sigma\rangle\in\mathscr{H}$ for some coefficients $\Psi_{\sigma}(p)$. What are these coefficients? Are they the wavefunctions? Do they depend continuously on $p$, if so should the sum over $p$ be replaced by an integral? Should these coefficients be square-integrable; $\Psi_{\sigma}(p)\in L^2(\Sigma_m,\mu,\mathbb{C})$ where $\Sigma_m$ is the mass shell and $\mu$ a Lorentz invariant measure? Is this expansion of an arbitrary state even correct?



Answer



By construction, the $\lvert p,\sigma\rangle$ are a basis of your vector space. So all your states are linear combinations of these basis vectors. However, you are right to inquire about the nature of the coefficients since it is not that simple in this case:


There are three different notions of "basis" for a quantum mechanical Hilbert space, which unfortunately few physics texts bother to properly distinguish:





  1. A finite-dimensional basis. In case your vector space is finite-dimensional, you have a finite number of basis vectors $\lvert v_i\rangle, i = 1,\dots,n$ and every vector is a linear combination $$ \lvert v\rangle = \sum_{i = 1}^n c_i \lvert v_i\rangle, c_i\in\mathbb{C}.$$ This definition has no further issues.




  2. A Hilbert basis. In case your vector space is infinite-dimensional and a separable Hilbert space you can take a countable number of basis vectors $\lvert v_i\rangle,i\in\mathbb{N}$ and every vector is an infinite linear combination $$ \lvert v\rangle = \sum_{i=1}^\infty c_i\lvert v_i\rangle,c\in\ell^2(\mathbb{C}),$$ where $c\in \ell^2(\mathbb{C})$ means that the sequence $c = (c_i)_{i\in\mathbb{N}}$ is square-summable as $\sum_{i=1}^\infty \lvert c_i \rvert^2 < \infty$.




  3. A rigged basis1. Again, in the case where the vector space is infinite-dimensional, we have a number of "basis" "vectors" $\lvert v(x)\rangle, x\in\mathbb{R}$ such that every vector is a "uncountably infinite" "linear combination" $$ "\lvert v\rangle = \int \psi(x)\lvert v(x)\rangle\mathrm{d}x",$$ where $\psi(x)\in L^2(\mathbb{R})$ is a square-integrable complex function, i.e. a "wavefunction". The reason for all the scare quotes here is that this notion is "easy" for the physicist to write down, but very hard for the mathematician to make sense of. Since $\langle v(x')\vert v(x)\rangle = \delta(x' -x)$, their inner product is ill-defined and these things are not vectors in the Hilbert space proper, but lie outside of it in the larger part of a rigged Hilbert space, see also this question and answer. The integral is also difficult to make rigorous, so you might as well replace it by a sum as Weinberg does, it is certainly neither an integral nor a sum as we would naively understand them, but it is clearly a generalization of the sum like the integral. Nevertheless, you should be familiar with this from basic quantum mechanics where we usually have no qualms about writing $1= \int \lvert x\rangle\langle x\rvert \mathrm{d}x$, and also $\psi(x) = \langle x \vert \psi \rangle$ and $\lvert \psi\rangle = \int \langle x\vert \psi\rangle \lvert x\rangle \mathrm{d}x$.





In this case, your $\lvert p,\sigma\rangle$ are a mixture of a finite basis and a rigged basis - there are only finitely many options for one-particle spins $\sigma$, but there are uncountably many choices of momentum. So, for fixed $p$ we have $\Phi(p)\in \mathbb{C}^n$ for $n = 2s + 1$ for $s$ the total spin of the particle. For fixed $\sigma$, we have $\Phi_\sigma \in L^2(\Sigma_m)$. So, altogether, $\Phi_\sigma(p)$ are the values of a $\mathbb{C}^n$-valued function that is square-integrable in each component, and to which you can only feed momenta $p$ with the correct $p^2 = -m^2$ relation.




1This terminology is my personal invention. If there's a proper name for these things, I'd be happy to hear it.


Friday, December 1, 2017

thermodynamics - Why does a gas get hot when suddenly compressed? What is happening at the molecular level?


My guess is that the molecules of gas all have the same speed as before, but now there are much more collisions per unit area onto the thermometer, thus making the thermometer read a higher temperature. If this is so, then density is directly related to temperature when a substance experiences a change in density.


Is this the case?




lateral thinking - James Bond : No Access



James Bond, while working on a top-secret case for many weeks in deep enemy territory, finally collected and stored lots of critical files on his tight-security Linux system. Even though the system was on the internet, no unauthorized user could ever break-in and access the files marked For-Your-Eyes-Only. He then secretly contacted his group (M, Q, Moneypenny, Etc) to process the files. After 30 minutes, they all responded that the system said "No Access". So Bond tried to access the files, and true enough, the system said "No Access".


Meanwhile some other folks (probably double-agents or hackers from SPECTRE) had read all the files. Bond realised that he had made a big mistake, out of habit.




What mistake did Bond commit, that all his work was leaked so easily ?




FYI 1 : Here the tags for this question are important.


FYI 2 : He quickly recovered from this situation to prevent further leakage.



Answer



Well perhaps




he saved the files with the wrong permissions — i.e., 007 (no access for owner or group, but full access for everyone else) instead of 770 (full access for owner and group, no access for anyone else).

(Probably an easy mistake to make when you've had the same code number for over 60 years.)



astrophysics - Position of Neutron Stars in H R diagrams


Why is that neutron stars are never depicted in a Hertzsprung-Russell diagram? They can be placed in the bottom left corner but you will never find any diagram in literature showing neutron stars.



Answer



The HR diagram is an observational diagram. Whilst neutron stars could be placed in the HR diagram in the same way as white dwarf stars are, it turns out to be impractical to do so because the photospheric luminosity and photospheric temperature of neutron stars is next to impossible to determine. The reason for this is two-fold: (i) Neutron stars start off very hot (interior temperatures of $\sim 10^{10}$K and photospheric temperatures of $\sim 10^{7}$K, but they cool very rapidly. Within $10^4 - 10^5$ years after the originating supernova they will have cooled below a million degrees, then photon cooling takes over from neutrino losses and they may cool to a few thousand degrees within 10 million years (e.g. Yakovlev & Pethick 2004). There are many uncertainties and unknowns in these processes - see below. (ii) The photospheric emission is usually dwarfed by emission from the magnetosphere or luminosity due to accretion from a companion or the interstellar medium.


One can theoretically work out where neutron stars should be by assuming that the emission is like that from a blackbody and that the radius $R \sim 10$ km.


In that case neutron stars lie on a locus defined by $$ \frac{L}{L_{\odot}} = 1.9\times 10^{-9} \left(\frac{T}{10^{4}K}\right)^4 $$



So, contrary to what you you say in your question, most neutron stars could be cool and very, very faint and spend the majority of their (cooling) lives at the bottom or even bottom-right of the HR diagram. There is actually a huge uncertainty over where neutron stars would appear on this locus. The only neutron stars with measured luminosities and temperatures are extremely young ($<10^{5}$ years) and these are still extremely hot $10^{6}K$ and quite luminous $\sim 0.1 L_{\odot}$. Old neutron stars are practically invisible, but their very low heat capacities means that any "reheating processes" could very effectively raise their temperatures. Such processes include Ohmic dissipation of the magnetic field, some kind of thermalisation of their rotational energy or accretion from the interstellar medium. For the latter, luminosities of $10^{20}-10^{21}$ W may be possible, implying effective temperatures of tens of thousands of Kelvin.


A neutron star at the same temperature as Sirius would have an absolute visual magnitude that was about 22 magnitudes fainter, $M_V \sim 23$. Another way of visualising this is that the neutron star cooling sequence is roughly parallel with the white dwarf cooling sequence but about 13 magnitudes fainter.


You never see this locus shown on an HR diagram because it is usually way off the bottom of the plot and there are no observed objects to populate it.


classical mechanics - Moment of a force about a given axis (Torque) - Scalar or vectorial?

I am studying Statics and saw that: The moment of a force about a given axis (or Torque) is defined by the equation: $M_X = (\vec r \times \...