Ooops! I have to correct myself: > The reason I chose the sparse format for the Fermionic case was not > because of storage considerations. Rather because I wanted to treat > problems without depending on the number of particles and the size of > the model space. I believe the framework will be much more flexible if > we can avoid specifying the fermi level.
FermionState actually takes the fermi_level as an argument, so in that sense, the fermi level is specified. What I mean is that I want to work with symbolic state indices, like in "single particle orbit i". With a dense representation, how can you store the information that "state i" is occupied? Øyvind --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy-patches" group. To post to this group, send email to sympy-patches@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sympy-patches+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy-patches?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
