Quantum of action: Planck, Einstein, Heisenberg.
a)
Planck united together two formulas ( Rayleigh–Jeansfor
for long and Wien’s for short wavelengths) and then divided them.
He was himself very surprised when the result was found correct.
And after that came . . . .
: " . . . some weeks of the hardest work of my life . . ."
The result was – quantum of action (as energy multiply time: h=Et)
The coefficient (h) was not in Rayleigh–Jeansfor or Wien’s formulas.
Planck took unit (h) as in some books is written:
“intuitively, instinctively, phenomenologically”
b)
In 1905 Einstein introduced unit (h) in different way.
Einstein wrote it as: h=kb
(Boltzmann coefficient multiply Wien’s displacement constant)
And in 1906 Einstein wrote that Planck’s and his results are equal.
But Einstein’s formula explains quantum nature more clearly.
c)
In 1925 Heisenberg went a step further.
He discovered “the uncertainty principle” (HUP): Et>h*
==…
History of the “quantum of action” (1900-1927)
a)
In 1900 Planck united together two formulas ( Rayleigh–Jeansfor
for long and Wien’s for short wavelengths) and then divided them.
He was himself very surprised when the result was found correct.
And after that came . . . .
: " . . . some weeks of the hardest work of my life . . ."
The result was – quantum of action (as energy multiply time: h=Et)
The coefficient (h) was neither in the Rayleigh–Jeansfor nor in the
Wien’s formulas. Planck took unit (h) as in some books are written:
“intuitively, instinctively, phenomenologically”
b)
In 1905 Einstein introduced unit (h) in different way.
Einstein wrote it as: h=kb
(Boltzmann coefficient multiply Wien’s displacement constant)
And in 1906 Einstein wrote that Planck’s and his results are equal.
But Einstein’s formula explains quantum nature more clearly.
c)
In 1913 Bohr introduced “quant of action” in the hydrogen-atom.
d)
In1923 De Broglie wrote that “quant of action” can be “pilot-wave”.
e)
In 1924 Goudsmit and Uhlenbeck wrote that “quant of action”
can work in another way as: h/2pi (h-bar)
f)
In 1925 Heisenberg went a step further.
He discovered “the uncertainty principle” (HUP): Et>h*
g)
In the same 1925 year Schrodinger explained that
de Broglie’s “pilot-wave” can work as “psi-wave function”.
h)
In 1926 Schrodinger found relation between his “psi-wave
function” and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
i)
In 1926 Born showed that could be probability of finding
the “quant of action” in local place of the “psi-wave function”.
j)
In1927 Dirac “put into place the last of quantum theory’s
building blocks”. He “playing with beautiful equations”
explained that the “quantum of action” must have one
negative anti-brother in “an unobserved infinite sea”.
==…
The QM interpretation doesn’t fit the logical presentation.
Feynman wrote:
" The theory of quantum electrodynamics describes Nature
as absurd from the point of view of common sense.
And it agrees fully with experiment.
So I hope you accept Nature as She is — absurd."
/ Book: QED : The Strange Theory of Light and Matter
page. 10. by R. Feynman /
==…
And what is your point?
(B.t.w.: Schrödinger, not “Schrodinger”.)
Sorry, I missed one great name: Wolfgang Ernst Pauli.
f)
In 1924 Pauli discovered that “the quantum of action” must obey
“the exclusion principle”.
==…
Feynman wrote:
" The theory of quantum electrodynamics describes Nature
as absurd from the point of view of common sense. "
Why our understanding QED and Nature are absurd?
My opinion, it is because:
a) We don’t know what Dirac’s “vacuum sea” (reference frame) is.
b) We don’t know the geometrical form of “quantum of action”.
c) We don’t know what impulses h and h* (bar) mean.
d) We don’t know why “quantum of action” has many formulas:
h=kb, E=hf and E=h*f, + E=Mc^2
==…
YOU don’t.
I do.
@James S Saint
If you know what Dirac’s “infinite vacuum sea” is then, please,
explain to an amateur as I am what it is.
It is an ocean of ultra-minuscule, ultra high frequency pulses of EMR (“Affectance”), much like the surface of a bowl of water sitting on a vibrator. That is what every “gravity field” is made of as well as all the space between those sub-atomic particles. And in reality, those particles are made of that same stuff, merely far more concentrated with a Lorentzian distribution of density…
It has always existed. It cannot, not exist. It is the make of space itself and all within.
If one could SEE the Affectance of “empty”:
…
Radiation, frequency cannot “always exist” . . . .
Radiation, frequency cannot be “forever” . . . . .
Every radiation, frequency sooner or later will go to zero . . . . .
==.
So you presume.
My conclusion.
Nature is not an absurd structure.
It is our “scientific” thought of Nature can be absurd,
it is our “philosophy of science” can be abstract.
How is possible to escape philosophical absurd?
My solution.
The history of the “quantum of action” (1900-1927) shows that
“quantum of action” can be a quantum of light, and
“quantum of action” can be an electron, and
“quantum of action” has connection with an antiparticle . . . . .
In the other words,
quantum of light, electron and antiparticle can be one and the same
real particle of different actions in different conditions. . This is possible
because “quantum of action” obeys “ The law of conservation and
transformation energy/mass”. “Quantum of action” has many formulas
and they can be tied together only through physical process of
“transformation” but what “transformation” means according to one
single “quantum of action” nobody explains.
The Existence begins on the quantum level and “quantum of action” is
primary particle of existence. Not from “big bang”, not from “Higgs boson”,
not from “string particles in 11-D”, not from “meson, muon, tau . . . .
and 1000 their brothers” but only from Planck’s / Einstein’s
“quantum of action” creation of Nature was started.
==…
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus
===…
Who told you that?
It is quite possible that the electromagnetic radiation is an eternal phenomenon.
Even if an EMR wave was cut in half every day, it would never, ever get to zero (Zeno’s Law).
The Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation exists about
14 billion years (after big bang) but sooner or later will be
disappeared to zero . . . .
Therefore . . .
Radiation, frequency cannot “always exist” . . . .
Radiation, frequency cannot be “forever” . . . . .
Every radiation, frequency sooner or later will go to zero . . . . .
==.
socratus
===========…
The CBR will never, ever go away. It is almost entirely impossible to be rid of it in even a very controlled bit of space. It can be reduced. It cannot ever be entirely removed, as shown in Young’s double-slit experiment.
And the Big Bang is just another creation myth for the masses.
That is merely a theory, one of thousand theories.
Why not? Your statement has never been proved.
Why not? Your statement has never been proved.
Why? Your statement has never been proved.
About 14 billion years ago the Universe as a whole was very hot
(after big bang) but in 1973 the Nobel prize was given for discovery
that the Universe as a whole has CBMR with the temperature about 2,7K.
It means that GBMR is not static condition but it goes down every time . . .
and today (in 2014) it is less than in the 1973 (2,7K).
And there isn’t any border to stop it until it will go to zero .
And there aren’t any forces to stop it until it will go to zero.
Oh, . … . . sorry . . . sorry… . . . there is one force.
There is one force that can destroyed zero condition and it is Entropy.
Entropy.
But the theme " Entropy" is another (different) story.
By the way, “the Big Bang” is not “just another creation myth for the masses”.
“the Big Bang” is our modern scientific education and scientific culture.
========… . .