Re: Mathematicians and Bra-Ket Notation
- From: galathaea <galathaea@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 18:27:19 -0500
junoexpress wrote:
Hi,
I "grew up" so to speak as a physicist, and over the years, found it
is just naturally easier for me to write inner products and just
thinking about vector spaces in general using bra-ket notation. I
don't know why, but it just helps me see things better.
Do other technical people outside of physics (math, engineering, etc)
use bra-ket notation much (or at all) in working with vector spaces?
Would people in math consider it strange or odd if you published a
paper in math using bra-ket notation?
there have been extensions to more general
algebraic and differential geometry settings
that have been floating around for some time
particularly
there is certainly more of an engineering focus here
but even graph theory has been infiltrated with the notation
http://arxiv.org/pdf/0710.1592
in category theory
there are natural definitions of scalar which exist in numerous types of categories
(particularly the monoidal categories that physicists love)
and the bra-ket has natural use
(bob coecke
whose work i regularly post about
has given much of the motivation here)
and of course
the math of hilbert modules regularly uses bra-kets to prove results
see http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0011076 as an example
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
.
- References:
- Mathematicians and Bra-Ket Notation
- From: junoexpress
- Mathematicians and Bra-Ket Notation
- Prev by Date: Re: eigenvalue
- Next by Date: Re: Extrapolate divisor & dividend from quotient?
- Previous by thread: Re: Mathematicians and Bra-Ket Notation
- Next by thread: Re: Mathematicians and Bra-Ket Notation
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
