1199:
has nothing to do with its representations. I think what is meant is that the association with the canonical generators is made through an identification via the fundamental representation. This can somewhat work as this representation is faithful but ONLY at the level of the Lie algebra relations, not its universal enveloping algebra, which is itself implicitly used in treating the CG problem (as the
Casimirs are defined in it). This can easily confuse readers with a more mathematical background. Why not give first the standard presentation in terms of the Cartan-Weyl generators (H_i and E_alpha) and then define those F-spin operators in terms of those. Also, I went and checked my paper version of citation and saw no reference to either the Cartan-Weyl or the F-spin operators, only a discussion of the Eightfold way. I compared the ISBN to be sure. (I could not find any mention of the F-spin operators through a quick check in the rest of the book, only the Gell-Mann matrices.
1229:. Arguably "redundantly", a student started this page as a compendium of "straight facts" necessary for these calculations, a place for these refugees to go to, instead of books. Please take a look at Greiner (a terrible book, I agree) which works at the level of these calculations. The F basis is handled well in pp 78-79 of Don Lichtenberg's standard text, pp 78-79, ISBN-13: 978-0123941992 : It would be pointless to seek them in a baby caricature undergraduate text such as Griffiths'. The basis fixes the structure constants, and hence the normalizations of all representations as utilized in routine applications in physics, such as the Casimirs following. Remember, students know group theory, and need to rush to fix some conventions; this is not a Lie Algebra tutorial. Other articles in WP beat the Cartan-Weyl basis to death. While it might be OK to insert small tweaks and explanations to alienate math readers less, here, it is extremely important to keep the
1181:
other Lie groups, I find many sections of this article confusing an vague? I disagree that this is a resolutely physics article. In fact, I object with the first sentence of the article. The second sentence gives the meaning of "Clebsch-Gordan coefficient" generally accepted in mathematical physics. I don't think that following the common habit in physics of abusing mathematical notations is best for an encyclopedic treatment of the topic. This yields incoherent articles, as a whole, on
Knowledge. However, I agree it can be relevant to mention the typical notations used in physics, but I would not write technically false mathematical statements. I see that you have actually updated that section of the article and took the quotient by the center.
84:
1131:"A slightly differently normalized standard basis consists of the F-spin operators, which are defined as F i ^ = 1 2 λ i {\displaystyle {\hat {F_{i}}}={\frac {1}{2}}\lambda _{i}} \hat{F_i}=\frac{1}{2}\lambda_i for the 3, and are utilized to apply to any representation of this algebra." What is that supposed to mean? F-spin operators are not well known thing. I supposed the "3" refers to the fundamental representation? I honestly don't understand what "and are utilized to apply to any representation of this algebra." is supposed to mean and I work with closely related tools.
74:
53:
1063:
one too verbose. On the other hand, it also doesn't hurt to have this section in there. I'm still working through the rest of the article, but I can try to edit it and address the faults that the original poster pointed out (Also: listing "Commutative" as a "property that a group has to satisfy" is misleading, even though the item correctly states that it may or may not be commutative).
388:) 13:32, 15 November 2014 (UTC) I might add that my involvement in this article was an accident. I was invited to review it, and I did not realize that the article covered a specialized subset of the C-G coeffiecients. Seeing that appeared to be quality prose that was above my head, I got involved, not realizing the a lower level WP article on the subject already exists. Cheers! --
1026:
long as it teaches somebody something. If you can see its flaws, it is for somebody other than you. I have fielded dozens of complaints, in another venue, about the elliptical terse style of WP technical pages. Deletion is the last option. Bona-fide efforts to improve need to be exhausted first. Remember, you are not a critic or a taskmaster, you are an editor. Why don't you get a
22:
357:
lower level, on
Wikiversity, because I am a tenured professor (i.e., not obligated to publish) who is alarmed at the high cost of education. We not only make students buy $ 100 books, but charge thousands of dollars per course to pay a PhD to write equations and lecture on the board. During this effort I have come to the following realization:
1103:
subalgebra is nearly precisely what an CSCO is: a “complete set of commuting operators”. The only problem is that it is actually not complete if one has to distinguish between points in the isospin-hypercharge (I_3-Y) plane that have more than one multiplicity, or when in a product representation, an irrep appears twice.
1062:
I think the original poster makes a good point. Including the definition of a group in this article does not improve readability, and I don't see any notation in it that is used in the rest of the article. Saying that other articles on wikipedia are too terse is not a compelling argument to make this
1007:
The section on groups is unnecessary (because anyone reading this knows what a group is, and a link on the first occurrence of the word "group" would be enough), doesn't follow
Knowledge standard notation, is not concise, uses bad grammar, and is inaccurate. (The sentence "For each element (x ) in G,
1102:
it is a pity that this CSCO acronym does not appear any more. I have been in contact with the French school around Claude Cohen-Tannoudji who introduced the concept quite frequently in their classic quantum mechanics textbook. They would really love to read that the mathematical object called Cartan
553:
Then there is the LaTeX issue. It's totally possible to write math-heavy articles without inline TeX. If you can't, then it is badly designed to begin with. This article is nicely designed, but has a lot of inline TeX code making it look like shit on some set-ups. WP articles are supposed to be read
374:
This includes the use of inline-Latex (in spite of its "ugliness"), and this includes avoiding the need to use equation numbers. It also involves hidden textboxes, and (IMHO) links to
Wikiveristy for specialized discussion. I am not qualified to speak to where SU(3) C-G coefficients belong. But
1202:
Some other comments: The sentence: "These
Casimir operators serve to label the irreducible representations of the Lie group algebra SU(3), because all states in a given representation assume the same value for each Casimir operator, which serves as the identity in a space with the dimension of that
1198:
Regarding the standard basis section, my main issue is not in the introduction of the F-spin operators as a new basis, but is rather that I sincerely find it difficult to understand what "and are utilized to apply to any representation of this algebra." means. If you pick a basis for the algebra it
1025:
Do not, please. Even in the interest of fixing notation, it is useful. Yes, it is bad, so improve it, and possibly condense it (There is more on groups than on Lie groups). But reduplication in WP is not a minus, it is a plus. Links do not always keep the reader focussed. It need not be concise, as
356:
The apex of my understanding of C-G coefficients occurred circa 1977 when I studied them for my prelims, convinced myself that I understood them but also hoped that the subject would not appear on the test. My interest in this project is different, but not entirely unimportant. I write at a much
234:
The only weakness I could see was that there is virtually no connection to how the CG coefficients are used in quantum mechanics. I vaguely remember them being associated with rotations of angular momentum eigenstates, and unfortunately, the article completely failed to refresh that memory. Could
157:
Hi, this is a page dealing specifically with the
Clebsch-Gordan coefficient of SU(3) group. SU(3) is an important group as it represents flavour symmetry, and the Clebsch-Gordan coefficients of SU(3) are used to understand the decay of many particles which has flavour symmetry. The page, will deal
1161:
generators employed in physics. If you kept reading, you'd see in the
Casimir section that they apply to all reps, not just the fundamental. This is a resolutely physics article. Indeed, most discussions on the direct product are meant to apply to the algebra, and for better or for worse, this is
1127:
There seems to be a few technical errors and unclear sentences: For instance "Thus U(3) can be decomposed into a direct product of U(1)⊗SU(3)". This is false, the intersection of both subgroups is not trivial. It is a semi-direct product. At the level of the Lie algebra, they will be, which might
1180:
I can certainly edit the page, but I thought it would be more appropriate to discuss it first. Also, technical commentaries can help by themselves. Isn't it something worthy to be pointed out to other editors that, as a mathematical physicist with published work on the
Clebsch-Gordan problem for
230:
I haven't thought seriously about
Clebsch-Gordan coefficients since my prelims at U.C. Berkeley back in 1977. Somebody else needs to verify that the equations are correct. I have made a deliberate decision to focus my efforts on Wikiversity and work primarily at the introductory college
518:
is almost entirely about SU(2), this article is about SU(3). There's no reason to merge them. The former already has an appropriate summary and link to the latter. Everything is fine as is, it does follow wikipedia policy. (Subpages are almost never used on wikipedia. It's different from
1222:
Here is the thing. There are plenty of mathematically elaborate articles in WP on several subjects, SU(3), Clebsches, and wonderful group theory. Unfortunately, they fell into the hands of mathematicians more interested in their compact abstract formulation of the subject, and
1206:
Apologies if I am not using the talk page for it's intended use. Aren't the talk pages precisely to discuss editorial issues? I am not well-versed on Knowledge policies and modus operandi, but wish to improve it on my topics of expertise and help it grow beyond simply
1128:
have confused people regarding the representation theory. Similarly, the notation "U(1)⊗SU(3)" is quite weird, as that would normally imply bilinearity which is meaningless on the groups themselves. Is what is meant here the Lie algebras? Or the group algebras?
1008:
there must be an element y in G such that product of x and y is the identity element e" is inaccurate. The equation afterwards clarifies, but it is absolutely necessary to have both xy=e and yx=e, and not just one or the other.) I'm just going to delete it.
1203:
representation." is rather vague. All states in an irrep are degenerate eigenvectors of the Casimirs with the same eigenvalue. A Casimir does not "serve as the identity" but rather, is a multiple of the identity on all irreps. This is Shur's lemma.
1106:
I do not like the current shape of the article (too many details, some of them irrelevant), and I will comment on that if I find time. Eventually, I would propose a streamlined version where at least this CSCO-Cartan connection is spelled out.
1237:
in the wrong place; you want to be in the SU(3) article, the Clebsch-Gordan article, or the Gell-Mann matrix article, or Eightforl way, before you descend here. Consider writing a self-standing article/stub to be linked here.
1279:
You appear to be focussing on the standard/trivial introductory sections, and not the CG sections that the former lead to by establishing language. What is wrong with placing links on the mystery articles you are hinting at?
1083:
The Acronym CSCO is introduced but then never used. I am guilty of doing that as well with names that I'd rather only type out once, but if it really only appears once it makes the text less readable. I'll delete it.
1162:
standard notation in the physics literature. You did not, exactly propose an improvement here, on this talk page. Topology issues are deprecated in Clebsching algorithms, of course. This is not a forum.
235:
somebody please add that application and explain exactly how they are used? (If you want, we could make a link to Wikiversity that includes a few examples. I would be glad to facilitate such an effort.)
1262:
Would it be worth renaming this article to 'representation theory of SU(3) so that it gets found together with representation theory of other important lie groups? and making the requisite changes to do
257:
By the way, was this article properly accepted by WP, or did the author simply change the title and re-post? If so, please forgive the author (assuming that the article is what it seems to be). --
810:
be used inline (for some reason) does not justify its use. Minor typographical differences, like between the two versions of an asterisk above are acceptable (if the alternative is inline TeX).
554:
on any machine. Some editors just don't give a damned because things look fine for them. Well, either that or they are simply to lazy to make it look good. Below is some utterly unnecessary TeX
332:
1342:
806:
If you don't see much difference, try Chrome with PNG rendering on a large screen. It will make you scream of horror. The fact that some editors are of the opinion that TeX
712:
1089:
1068:
1306:. I know general representation theory is not really the point of this article, and such an article ought really to be a new article rather than a renaming of this one.
817:
should be in TeX, as a long term goal, because it produces the best overall quality, including of ordinary text. This is not realistic today and probably never will be.
542:
I have removed two categories (rotation + 3d rotation). I know that you can speak of rotation in flavor space and the like, but the categories in question are meant for
488:
The aforementioned "review" was informal, as I already said. I am more of a Wikiversity editor than a Knowledge person. But I just noticed that you have an article on
831:
Well, I prefer the inline TeX. It makes the math stands out and not be confused with the text. I don't see why the main point should be for the article to LOOK good?
466:
434:
648:
735:
949:
945:
931:
668:
619:
599:
579:
140:
1303:
857:
The second sentence seems to be ungrammatical. The decomposition is not the subject or object of a verb. There seems to be no main verb in the sentence.
887:
169:
Consider two coupled 3-D Harmonic oscillators, and try to decouple the representation of their combined Hilbert space into direct sum of some subspaces.
903:
539:
First off, I should say that I appreciate the presence of the article. I'll read it in detail at some point. It certainly fills in a need topic-wise.
1337:
130:
1226:
thereby made them inaccessible and useless to physics students interested in performing a standard amplitude calculation in standard conventions
203:
83:
1011:
223:, a person with whom I have had no contact. I have never reviewed an article for Knowledge, so this "review" is a purely informal affair.
1208:
1182:
1138:
838:
227:
I like the over-all look of the article, and strongly endorse the use of in-line Latex for such articles. It look very professional to me.
106:
1332:
1027:
927:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
1085:
1064:
515:
496:
490:
1311:
1299:
1269:
97:
58:
992:
33:
1046:
I issued a good faith revert due to content blanking/removal. It seems this user isn't interested in the conversation.
921:
904:
https://web.archive.org/web/20141107170523/http://physics.unm.edu/Courses/Finley/p467/handouts/YoungTableauxSubs.pdf
473:
199:
1307:
1265:
1015:
1315:
1293:
1273:
1247:
1216:
1190:
1171:
1146:
1116:
1093:
1072:
1055:
1039:
1019:
997:
948:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
873:
846:
826:
528:
509:
477:
397:
343:
266:
251:
207:
505:
393:
385:
278:
Regarding the angular momentum interpretation, perhaps you are thinking of the Clebsch-Gordan coefficients for
262:
247:
1212:
1186:
1142:
842:
983:
907:
895:
468:
we cannot say the same thing. These CG-coefficients are used in coupling of three state systems like colour.
172:
The expansion is the Clebsch-Gordan series for SU(3). And correspondingly the coefficients can be found out.
1289:
1243:
1167:
1035:
1281:
967:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
955:
469:
220:
195:
39:
894:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
281:
1157:
s. They are a standard change of basis to fit in with the standard conventions and normalizations for
1134:
1112:
1108:
834:
524:
191:
351:
335:
21:
1051:
501:
389:
381:
339:
273:
258:
243:
105:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
915:
673:
952:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
968:
1285:
1239:
1163:
1031:
869:
861:
822:
187:
P.S.- If any one has anything to say about the plan or the page, please feel free to say it.
975:
520:
439:
407:
627:
364:
1047:
934:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
717:
89:
974:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
653:
604:
584:
564:
1326:
166:
Find out the symmetry group and their algebra of a 3-D isotropic Harmonic Oscillator.
865:
818:
922:
http://homepages.physik.uni-muenchen.de/~vondelft/Papers/ClebschGordan/%26nsbp%3B-
941:
73:
52:
940:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
367:
that is highly mathematical needs to be cast in somewhat unconventional format
79:
436:
group CG-coefficients are related to angular momenta addition. in case of
240:
I just realized that WP has an article on CG coefficients--see next topic
908:
http://physics.unm.edu/Courses/Finley/p467/handouts/YoungTableauxSubs.pdf
102:
175:
Use a different approach and solve the CG series from Young tableux.
1298:
Hi, sorry I should have been more clear. I meant articles such as
334:. Or is there a higher-dimensional generalization of this idea? --
15:
494:. If this were Wikiversity, I would make this a subpage of
898:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
891:
720:
676:
656:
630:
607:
587:
567:
442:
410:
284:
101:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
944:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
178:
Finally try to find the CGC from simple symmetries.
729:
706:
662:
642:
613:
593:
573:
500:. I have no idea of Knowledge's policy on this.--
460:
428:
326:
375:if they belong on Wikiversity, I'm here to help.
930:This message was posted before February 2018.
181:Answer the question, where are the CGC needed?
163:Groups, Symmetry Groups and their properties.
8:
1233:for these applications. My sense is you are
484:Related article: Clebsch–Gordan coefficients
1343:C-Class physics articles of Low-importance
1304:representation theory of the Lorentz group
1132:
886:I have just modified one external link on
832:
550:and things related to ordinary rotations.
47:
719:
675:
655:
629:
606:
586:
566:
441:
409:
283:
1153:Not well known to you, perhaps, for the
1086:50f61674674d7a04461a081b25bee6b2584a5e1d
1065:50f61674674d7a04461a081b25bee6b2584a5e1d
49:
19:
813:Incidentally, I'm of the opinion that
219:I was asked to review this article by
1282:Special unitary group#The group SU(3)
888:Clebsch–Gordan coefficients for SU(3)
776:( in symbols, for every two elements
670:( in symbols, for every two elements
7:
95:This article is within the scope of
38:It is of interest to the following
327:{\displaystyle SU(2)\cong Spin(3)}
14:
890:. Please take a moment to review
82:
72:
51:
20:
1338:Low-importance physics articles
135:This article has been rated as
1300:representation theory of SU(2)
1094:12:47, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
1073:12:30, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
864:. And please sign your posts.
455:
449:
423:
417:
321:
315:
297:
291:
1:
874:10:57, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
747:: For every pair of elements
561:: For every pair of elements
529:03:57, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
510:01:06, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
478:08:02, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
398:13:45, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
344:01:32, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
267:16:39, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
252:01:10, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
208:04:25, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
115:Knowledge:WikiProject Physics
109:and see a list of open tasks.
1117:18:27, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
707:{\displaystyle x,y\in G,x*y}
118:Template:WikiProject Physics
827:19:11, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
516:Clebsch–Gordan coefficients
497:Clebsch–Gordan coefficients
491:Clebsch–Gordan coefficients
1359:
1284:certainly links here, no?
998:07:13, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
961:(last update: 5 June 2024)
883:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
141:project's importance scale
1099:Hello unknown wikipedian,
1056:01:54, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
1040:18:51, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
1020:15:31, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
134:
67:
46:
1333:C-Class physics articles
1316:22:38, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
1294:22:06, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
1274:21:29, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
1248:13:01, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
1217:00:14, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
1191:00:14, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
1172:20:21, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
1147:11:12, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
847:10:43, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
1231:basic cheat-sheet facts
879:External links modified
215:Review of this article?
1123:A few technical errors
731:
708:
664:
644:
615:
595:
575:
462:
430:
328:
28:This article is rated
732:
709:
665:
645:
616:
596:
576:
463:
461:{\displaystyle SU(3)}
431:
429:{\displaystyle SU(2)}
329:
1308:Zephyr the west wind
1266:Zephyr the west wind
1079:Unnecessary Acronyms
1030:for accountability?
942:regular verification
718:
674:
654:
628:
605:
585:
565:
440:
408:
282:
158:with the following:-
932:After February 2018
643:{\displaystyle x*y}
98:WikiProject Physics
1003:Section 1 - groups
986:InternetArchiveBot
937:InternetArchiveBot
730:{\displaystyle G.}
727:
704:
660:
640:
611:
591:
571:
535:A couple of things
458:
426:
324:
34:content assessment
1149:
1137:comment added by
962:
849:
837:comment added by
663:{\displaystyle G}
614:{\displaystyle G}
594:{\displaystyle y}
574:{\displaystyle x}
237:Note added later:
211:
194:comment added by
155:
154:
151:
150:
147:
146:
1350:
996:
987:
960:
959:
938:
919:
801:
797:
775:
771:
758:
754:
750:
736:
734:
733:
728:
713:
711:
710:
705:
669:
667:
666:
661:
649:
647:
646:
641:
620:
618:
617:
612:
600:
598:
597:
592:
580:
578:
577:
572:
549:
519:wikiversity.) --
470:Arkadipta Sarkar
467:
465:
464:
459:
435:
433:
432:
427:
355:
333:
331:
330:
325:
277:
221:Arkadipta Sarkar
210:
196:Arkadipta Sarkar
188:
123:
122:
121:physics articles
119:
116:
113:
92:
87:
86:
76:
69:
68:
63:
55:
48:
31:
25:
24:
16:
1358:
1357:
1353:
1352:
1351:
1349:
1348:
1347:
1323:
1322:
1259:
1125:
1081:
1012:199.249.110.156
1005:
990:
985:
953:
946:have permission
936:
913:
896:this simple FaQ
881:
855:
799:
777:
773:
763:
756:
752:
748:
716:
715:
672:
671:
652:
651:
626:
625:
603:
602:
583:
582:
563:
562:
543:
537:
486:
438:
437:
406:
405:
349:
280:
279:
271:
217:
189:
120:
117:
114:
111:
110:
88:
81:
61:
32:on Knowledge's
29:
12:
11:
5:
1356:
1354:
1346:
1345:
1340:
1335:
1325:
1324:
1321:
1320:
1319:
1318:
1258:
1255:
1253:
1251:
1250:
1209:198.58.159.147
1196:
1195:
1194:
1193:
1183:198.58.159.147
1175:
1174:
1139:198.58.159.147
1124:
1121:
1120:
1119:
1104:
1100:
1080:
1077:
1076:
1075:
1059:
1058:
1043:
1042:
1004:
1001:
980:
979:
972:
925:
924:
910:
902:Added archive
880:
877:
854:
851:
839:198.58.159.147
804:
803:
738:
737:
726:
723:
703:
700:
697:
694:
691:
688:
685:
682:
679:
659:
639:
636:
633:
610:
590:
570:
536:
533:
532:
531:
485:
482:
481:
480:
457:
454:
451:
448:
445:
425:
422:
419:
416:
413:
401:
400:
377:
376:
371:
370:
359:
358:
323:
320:
317:
314:
311:
308:
305:
302:
299:
296:
293:
290:
287:
274:Guy vandegrift
255:
254:
232:
228:
216:
213:
186:
183:
182:
179:
176:
173:
170:
167:
164:
159:
153:
152:
149:
148:
145:
144:
137:Low-importance
133:
127:
126:
124:
107:the discussion
94:
93:
90:Physics portal
77:
65:
64:
62:Low‑importance
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1355:
1344:
1341:
1339:
1336:
1334:
1331:
1330:
1328:
1317:
1313:
1309:
1305:
1301:
1297:
1296:
1295:
1291:
1287:
1283:
1278:
1277:
1276:
1275:
1271:
1267:
1264:
1256:
1254:
1249:
1245:
1241:
1236:
1232:
1228:
1227:
1221:
1220:
1219:
1218:
1214:
1210:
1204:
1200:
1192:
1188:
1184:
1179:
1178:
1177:
1176:
1173:
1169:
1165:
1160:
1156:
1152:
1151:
1150:
1148:
1144:
1140:
1136:
1129:
1122:
1118:
1114:
1110:
1105:
1101:
1098:
1097:
1096:
1095:
1091:
1087:
1078:
1074:
1070:
1066:
1061:
1060:
1057:
1053:
1049:
1045:
1044:
1041:
1037:
1033:
1029:
1024:
1023:
1022:
1021:
1017:
1013:
1009:
1002:
1000:
999:
994:
989:
988:
977:
973:
970:
966:
965:
964:
957:
951:
947:
943:
939:
933:
928:
923:
917:
911:
909:
905:
901:
900:
899:
897:
893:
889:
884:
878:
876:
875:
871:
867:
863:
858:
852:
850:
848:
844:
840:
836:
829:
828:
824:
820:
816:
811:
809:
796:
792:
788:
784:
780:
770:
766:
762:
746:
743:
742:
741:
724:
721:
701:
698:
695:
692:
689:
686:
683:
680:
677:
657:
637:
634:
631:
624:
608:
588:
568:
560:
557:
556:
555:
551:
547:
540:
534:
530:
526:
522:
517:
514:
513:
512:
511:
507:
503:
499:
498:
493:
492:
483:
479:
475:
471:
452:
446:
443:
420:
414:
411:
403:
402:
399:
395:
391:
387:
383:
379:
378:
373:
372:
368:
366:
361:
360:
353:
348:
347:
346:
345:
341:
337:
318:
312:
309:
306:
303:
300:
294:
288:
285:
275:
269:
268:
264:
260:
253:
249:
245:
241:
238:
233:
229:
226:
225:
224:
222:
214:
212:
209:
205:
201:
197:
193:
180:
177:
174:
171:
168:
165:
162:
161:
160:
142:
138:
132:
129:
128:
125:
108:
104:
100:
99:
91:
85:
80:
78:
75:
71:
70:
66:
60:
57:
54:
50:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
1286:Cuzkatzimhut
1261:
1260:
1252:
1240:Cuzkatzimhut
1234:
1230:
1225:
1224:
1205:
1201:
1197:
1164:Cuzkatzimhut
1158:
1154:
1133:— Preceding
1130:
1126:
1082:
1032:Cuzkatzimhut
1010:
1006:
984:
981:
956:source check
935:
929:
926:
885:
882:
859:
856:
833:— Preceding
830:
814:
812:
807:
805:
794:
790:
786:
782:
778:
768:
764:
760:
744:
740:Try instead
739:
622:
558:
552:
545:
541:
538:
495:
489:
487:
362:
270:
256:
239:
236:
218:
190:— Preceding
184:
156:
136:
96:
40:WikiProjects
853:Bad grammar
798:is also in
772:is also in
714:is also in
650:is also in
1327:Categories
1109:DieHenkels
1028:WP account
993:Report bug
365:exposition
185:Thank you,
1207:donating.
1048:JeremiahY
976:this tool
969:this tool
916:dead link
862:so fix it
404:Actually
363:Wikitext
352:Sammy1339
336:Sammy1339
1257:Renaming
1135:unsigned
982:Cheers.—
835:unsigned
815:all text
502:guyvan52
390:guyvan52
382:guyvan52
259:guyvan52
244:guyvan52
204:contribs
192:unsigned
920:tag to
892:my edit
866:YohanN7
819:YohanN7
761:product
745:Closure
623:product
559:Closure
139:on the
112:Physics
103:Physics
59:Physics
30:C-class
1235:really
912:Added
808:should
759:, the
621:, the
231:level.
36:scale.
1263:this.
1159:su(N)
860:Then
521:Steve
1312:talk
1290:talk
1270:talk
1244:talk
1213:talk
1187:talk
1168:talk
1143:talk
1113:talk
1090:talk
1069:talk
1052:talk
1036:talk
1016:talk
870:talk
843:talk
823:talk
751:and
581:and
525:talk
506:talk
474:talk
394:talk
386:talk
340:talk
263:talk
248:talk
200:talk
950:RfC
906:to
755:in
601:in
544:SO(
131:Low
1329::
1314:)
1302:,
1292:)
1272:)
1246:)
1215:)
1189:)
1170:)
1145:)
1115:)
1092:)
1071:)
1054:)
1038:)
1018:)
963:.
958:}}
954:{{
918:}}
914:{{
872:)
845:)
825:)
789:,
785:∈
699:∗
687:∈
635:∗
527:)
508:)
476:)
396:)
380:--
342:)
301:≅
265:)
250:)
206:)
202:•
1310:(
1288:(
1268:(
1242:(
1211:(
1185:(
1166:(
1155:F
1141:(
1111:(
1088:(
1067:(
1050:(
1034:(
1014:(
995:)
991:(
978:.
971:.
868:(
841:(
821:(
802:.
800:G
795:y
793:∗
791:x
787:G
783:y
781:,
779:x
774:G
769:y
767:∗
765:x
757:G
753:y
749:x
725:.
722:G
702:y
696:x
693:,
690:G
684:y
681:,
678:x
658:G
638:y
632:x
609:G
589:y
569:x
548:)
546:n
523:(
504:(
472:(
456:)
453:3
450:(
447:U
444:S
424:)
421:2
418:(
415:U
412:S
392:(
384:(
369:.
354::
350:@
338:(
322:)
319:3
316:(
313:n
310:i
307:p
304:S
298:)
295:2
292:(
289:U
286:S
276::
272:@
261:(
246:(
242:-
198:(
143:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
