Impact
~6k
people reached
- 0 posts edited
- 0 helpful flags
- 6 votes cast
Jun
26 |
revised |
Stationary distribution of last passage percolation
Nature of stationary limit clarified |
Jun
26 |
comment |
Stationary distribution of last passage percolation
Thanks for the reply, Ofer. I'm actually looking for something a bit different from Johansson's result, which as you point out is not stationary in the sense that I'm after. On reflection the right way to phrase this is in terms of the Buseman functions |
Jun
25 |
revised |
Stationary distribution of last passage percolation
added 1 character in body |
Jun
25 |
asked | Stationary distribution of last passage percolation |
Jun
15 |
comment |
Infinitesimal variation of spectrum of Schrödinger operator with changing domain
Thanks Christian... could you elaborate what you mean by "extra" boundary condition? I want to move the boundary. |
Jun
12 |
asked | Infinitesimal variation of spectrum of Schrödinger operator with changing domain |
Jun
3 |
answered | No limit shape for random Young diagrams under z-measure? |
May
24 |
awarded | Nice Question |
May
18 |
awarded | Yearling |
May
18 |
asked | No limit shape for random Young diagrams under z-measure? |
Mar
21 |
awarded | Popular Question |
Mar
5 |
awarded | Curious |
Mar
4 |
comment |
Central limit theorem with degenerate covariance matrix
Thanks Iosif. My question relates to the fact that before taking the limit in the CLT the (finite) sum of random vectors DOESN'T lie in this subspace, and it is these deviations I would like to quantify. |
Mar
4 |
asked | Central limit theorem with degenerate covariance matrix |
Nov
26 |
awarded | Commentator |
Nov
26 |
comment |
translation invariance of the Laughlin wave function
Isn't the quantity defined in question 1 just the probability to find k particles in D? Then the answer is evidently no, for the same naive reason. That is, if you put the disk where the density is small, the above probability is small. |
Nov
26 |
comment |
translation invariance of the Laughlin wave function
This is no problem: a droplet centered at $z_0$ may be obtained by adding a factor $e^{z_iz_0/2}$ for each coordinate, which retains the desired properties of the Laughlin state but shifts the density. |
Nov
26 |
comment |
translation invariance of the Laughlin wave function
If I could chip in: the question being posed is more basic, and is concerned with whether the density of the Laughlin state is translationally invariant. It is not, on account of the Gaussian factor, and this leads to a circular Quantum Hall droplet even for low $q$. |
Oct
31 |
revised |
Nature of separatrix in Fokker--Planck Hamiltonian with two degrees of freedom
Added figure |
Oct
30 |
asked | Nature of separatrix in Fokker--Planck Hamiltonian with two degrees of freedom |