Don't you have to conjugate the ket? Like I don't think braket is dot multiplication
You can assume a and b are real to make the joke make sense.
You can extend the dot product to imaginary fields, there are a couple of standard extractions. If I remember correctly (but my quantum physics background is really poor, so I’m ready to be proven wrong) the one compatible with the bra-ket notation is
a dot b := sum_i conj(a)_i b_i
The current administration has removed all genders from science, so all verb stems are now uninflected in the quantum tense, sorry.
Oh the duality!
THIS SIMPLE TRICK RAISED $1M STARTUP MONRY (100% GUARANTEED)
Investor money embezzlement speedrun any%
Took me too long to decipher the field
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
