Given the function :the operator can be written in Planck units as:often written without function arguments as:Note how this looks just like the Laplacian in Einstein notation, since the d'Alembert operator is just a generalization of the laplace operator to Minkowski space.
In the case of field however, we can expand the Lagrangian out further, to also integrate over the space coordinates and their derivatives.
Since we are now working with something that gets integrated over space to obtain the total action, much like density would be integrated over space to obtain a total mass, the name "Lagrangian density" is fitting.
Of course, if we were to write it like that all the time we would go mad, so we can just write a much more condensed vectorized version using the gradient with :
And in the context of special relativity, people condense that even further by adding to the spacetime Four-vector as well, so you don't even need to write that separate pesky .
The main point of talking about the Lagrangian density instead of a Lagrangian for fields is likely that it treats space and time in a more uniform way, which is a basic requirement of special relativity: we have to be able to mix them up somehow to do Lorentz transformations. Notably, this is a key ingredient in a/the formulation of quantum field theory.
Some sources say that this is just the part that says that the norm of a function is the same as the norm of its Fourier transform.
The comment at math.stackexchange.com/questions/446870/bijectiveness-injectiveness-and-surjectiveness-of-fourier-transformation-define/1235725#1235725 may be of interest, it says that the bijection statement is an easy consequence from the norm one, thus the confusion.
TODO does it require it to be in as well? Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Plancherel_theorem&oldid=987110841 says yes, but courses.maths.ox.ac.uk/node/view_material/53981 does not mention it.
The Kibble balance is so precise and reproducible that it was responsible for the 2019 redefinition of the Kilogram.
NIST-4 Kibble balance
. Source. It relies rely on not one, but three macroscopic quantum mechanical effects:How cool is that! As usual, the advantage of those effects is that they are discrete, and have very fixed values that don't depend either:One downside of using some quantum mechanical effects is that you have to cool everything down to 5K. But that's OK, we've got liquid helium!
- atomic spectra: basis for the caesium standard which produces precise time and frequency
- Josephson effect: basis for the Josephson voltage standard, which produces precise voltage
- quantum Hall effect: basis for the quantum Hall effect, which produces precise electrical resistance
- on the physical dimensions of any apparatus (otherwise fabrication precision would be an issue)
- small variations of temperature, magnetic field and so on
The operating principle is something along:Then, based on all this, you can determine how much the object weights.
- generate a precise frequency with a signal generator, ultimately calibrated by the Caesium standard
- use that precise frequency to generate a precise voltage with a Josephson voltage standard
- convert that precise voltage into a precise electric current by using the quantum Hall effect, which produces a very precise electrical resistance
- use that precise current to generate a precise force on the object your weighing, pushing it against gravity
- then you precisely measure both:
- local gravity with a gravimeter
- the displacement acceleration of the object with a laser setup
How We're Redefining the kg by Veritasium
. Source. - youtu.be/ZfNygYuuVAE?t=854: they don't actually use the Quantum Hall effect device during operation, they only use it to calibrate other non-quantum resistors
Maximum current that can flow across a Josephson junction, as can be directly seen from the Josephson equations.
Is a fixed characteristic value of the physical construction of the junction.
It represents an internal state of the junction.
It is called "AC effect" because when we apply a DC voltage, it produces an alternating current on the device.
By looking at the Josephson equations, we see that a positive constant, then just increases linearly without bound.
Wikipedia mentions that this frequency is , so it is very very high, so we are not able to view individual points of the sine curve separately with our instruments.
Also it is likely not going to be very useful for many practical applications in this mode.
An I-V curve can also be seen at: Figure "Electron microscope image of a Josephson junction its I-V curve".
I-V curve of the AC Josephson effect
. Source. Voltage is horizontal, current vertical. The vertical bar in the middle is the effect of interest: the current is going up and down very quickly between , the Josephson current of the device. Because it is too quick for the oscilloscope, we just see a solid vertical bar.
Superconducting Transition of Josephson junction by Christina Wicker (2016)
Source. Amazing video that presumably shows the screen of a digital oscilloscope doing a voltage sweep as temperature is reduced and superconductivity is reached.If you shine microwave radiation on a Josephson junction, it produces a fixed average voltage that depends only on the frequency of the microwave. TODO how is that done more precisely? How to you produce and inject microwaves into the thing?
The Wiki page gives the formula: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephson_effect#The_inverse_AC_Josephson_effect You get several sinusoidal harmonics, so the output is not a perfect sine. But the infinite sum of the harmonics has a fixed average voltage value.
And en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephson_voltage_standard#Josephson_effect mentions that the effect is independent of the junction material, physical dimension or temperature.
All of the above, compounded with the fact that we are able to generate microwaves with extremely precise frequency with an atomic clock, makes this phenomenon perfect as a Volt standard, the Josephson voltage standard.
TODO understand how/why it works better.
One is reminded of Nick Leeson.
One things must be said: the root cause of all of this is the replication crisis.
This is why he managed to go on for so long.
Ciro Santilli once was at student a hackthon, where he proposed working on OurBigBook.com to others.
The only person who showed interest was a follower of the sect.
Hardcoded and unique network addresses for every single device on Earth.
Started with 48 bits (6 bytes), usually given as 01:23:45:67:89:AB but people now encouraged to use 64-bit ones.
How they are assigned: www.quora.com/How-are-MAC-addresses-assigned Basically IEEE gives out the 3 first bytes to device manufacturers that register, this is called the organizationally unique identifier, and then each manufacturer keeps their own devices unique.
There are unlisted articles, also show them or only show them.

