Timeline for Definition of WignerD function?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 30, 2021 at 9:14 | history | edited | J. M.'s missing motivation | CC BY-SA 4.0 | deleted 15 characters in body; edited tags |
| Apr 8, 2019 at 0:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackMma/status/1115041697233362944 | ||
| Mar 8, 2019 at 1:42 | history | edited | J. M.'s missing motivation | edited tags | |
| Jan 22, 2019 at 18:32 | vote | accept | Semiclassical | ||
| Jan 19, 2019 at 14:12 | answer | added | Roman | timeline score: 11 | |
| Jan 19, 2019 at 9:29 | comment | added | C. E.♦ | @Roman It would be good to make that an answer. | |
| Jan 18, 2019 at 22:02 | comment | added | Roman | Quoting arxiv.org/pdf/1710.11282.pdf for the $d$-matrices: "Note that the MATHEMATICA sign convention is $\text{WignerD}[\{j,m_1,m_2\},\theta] = d^j_{-m1,-m2}(\theta)$." And yes, the signs of the phase exponentials for $\alpha$ and $\gamma$ differ as well, as far as I remember; but those are easy to check. | |
| Jan 18, 2019 at 21:49 | comment | added | Semiclassical | @Roman Is that sign convention just a matter of plus/minus in the exponents? That'd be consistent with what I saw above. | |
| Jan 18, 2019 at 21:17 | comment | added | Roman | Yes there are two common sign conventions. Mathematica doesn't use the one that most physicists use (the Wigner sign convention). | |
| Jan 18, 2019 at 19:05 | history | asked | Semiclassical | CC BY-SA 4.0 |