When dealing with electronic correlations in solids, one finds that they often resemble those in corresponding molecules or clusters. Hence one would expect quantum chemistry and solid-state theory to be two areas of research with many links and cross fertilization. Regrettably this is not the case. The two fields have diverged to such an extent that it is frequently difficult to find even a common language, something we hope will change in the future. In particular it has become clear that the various methods applied in chemistry and in solid-state theory are simply different approximations to the same set of cumulant equations.Peter Fulde, Correlated electrons in quantum matter (World Scientific, 2012), pages 3-4.
Thursday, March 21, 2013
Fulde on the chemistry-physics divide
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
What criteria should be used to evaluate theories of emergence properties?
What criteria do people use to decide if a theory in physics is successful? For special relativity, general relativity, and quantum theory, ...
-
An interesting and controversial question for Ph.D's in science and engineering is too what extent students should be expected to have ...
-
Some of my colleagues and I have started an interesting discussion about how to teach quantum theory to undergraduates. We have courses in t...
-
As years go by the PhD thesis in science and engineering is less and less of a ``thesis'' and more just a box to tick. There was a t...
This is not exactly the same thing as you quoted from Fulde. But I would like to point out that, in my very limited knowledge of computational quantum many-body physics, it appears to me that some interesting progress has been made in this area thanks to fruitful discourse with quantum chemistry. Specifically, I am referring to the solution of the N-representability problem (David Mazziotti, 2012) and the recent developement in variational methods (Garnet Chan, 2011 and onwards).
ReplyDelete