Skip to main content

simplifying expressions - Assumptions on unknown functions


I'm trying to do analytic calculations in a quantum mechanic harmonic oscillator basis. Specifically I want to be able to evaluate functions of the many particle density.


I define the following functions: [definitions]


(* Harmonic Oscillator Eigenstate *)
basis[i_, z_] = Pi^(-1/4)/Sqrt[2^i Factorial[i]] Exp[-z^2/2] HermiteH[i, z];
(* Orbital *)

orb[i_, z_] = Sum[c[i, k] basis[k, z], {k, 0, t}];
(* Particle density of one orbital *)
orbitaldens[i_, z_] = Conjugate[orb[i, z]] psi[i, z];
(* Total density *)
dens[z_] = Sum[a[i] orbitaldens[i, z], {i, 1, n}];

To help Mathematica I define some assumptions beforehand: [assumptions]


$Assumptions = Element[z, Reals] && (* Real-space coordinate is real *)
Element[{n, t}, Integers] && n > 0 && t > 0 && (* Just indices *)
Element[c[i_, j_], Complexes] && (* Complex state vector *)

Element[a[i_], Reals]; (* Real filling factor *)

What is the correct way to define assumptions on an unknown function? Here c[i_, j_] should take integers i, and j and return a complex number. a[i_] on the other hand should take on integer i and return a positive real number.


Unfortunately, the evaluation of the definitons takes very long if I include these assumptions. Without them the definitions block takes about a second to evaluate.


However, I need those assumptions, so Mathematica can do useful simplifications. For example Conjugate[orb[i,z]] orb[i,z]//FullSimplify should simplify to Abs[orb[i,z]]^2. But the same should work, if I only apply the complex conjugation to c[i,k] inside orb[i,z], because basis[i,z] is real. So far, this takes too long to evaluate.


Is it possible to speed this whole thing up?


Another problem I found is the codomain of the Factorial The following two expressions do not evaluate to True, neither to False. They just repeat the first parameter of Refine:


Refine[Element[Sqrt[Factorial[i]], Reals], Element[i, Integers] && i > 0]
Refine[Factorial[i] > 0, Element[i, Integers] && i > 0]


In words, the factorial of a positive integer is not necessarily positive.


What is wrong there? I don't see how the factorial of a positive integer could become negative. (In symbolic maths)




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]

plotting - Mathematica: 3D plot based on combined 2D graphs

I have several sigmoidal fits to 3 different datasets, with mean fit predictions plus the 95% confidence limits (not symmetrical around the mean) and the actual data. I would now like to show these different 2D plots projected in 3D as in but then using proper perspective. In the link here they give some solutions to combine the plots using isometric perspective, but I would like to use proper 3 point perspective. Any thoughts? Also any way to show the mean points per time point for each series plus or minus the standard error on the mean would be cool too, either using points+vertical bars, or using spheres plus tubes. Below are some test data and the fit function I am using. Note that I am working on a logit(proportion) scale and that the final vertical scale is Log10(percentage). (* some test data *) data = Table[Null, {i, 4}]; data[[1]] = {{1, -5.8}, {2, -5.4}, {3, -0.8}, {4, -0.2}, {5, 4.6}, {1, -6.4}, {2, -5.6}, {3, -0.7}, {4, 0.04}, {5, 1.0}, {1, -6.8}, {2, -4.7}, {3, -1.