Not physics. There's no units on the numbers. Math has always been ahead of physics equation-wise. So now we know that probability theory can be used to derive the wave equation and even Schroedinger's equation, if we assume the time variation to be exponential. So as far as I am concerned it's all sampling theory.

If you have his paper, look at equation 4.1. Notice that the beta term is a summation and that the summation avoids the term where the delta function is non-zero. So the beta term is always zero. So why even write it down.

Later on in the derivation he says that his result comes from using the non-zero values of the delta function. In fact, in deriving that EM potential he equates a product of the psi functions to the delta function. How could a probability be either zero or infinity, which is the property of the delta function.

He claims that I do not know what a Dirac delta function is. But it seems to me that he may be confusing the Dirac delta function with the Kronecker delta function.

There was a time when I thought he had done something useful. But having examined his derivation in detail I am coming to the conclusion that it is worthless. I have questioned him on these details. But his response is just to accuse me of not knowing how to use a Dirac delta function.

Regards,

Richard

• "Our" longest sustained topic ever here thus settled? - occupant - May 14, 2002 - 07:27 UTC
• I think your insight is as keen as your wit, Mike (nt) - pmartin - May 15, 2002 - 23:03 UTC
  • Although I'm residential, I'll pass along your remarks to Mike - occupant - May 15, 2002 - 23:26 UTC