<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Constant&#8217;s Secrets. A Different Look at Planck&#8217;s  Constant</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sciscoop.com/2008-11-17-133516-56.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sciscoop.com/2008-11-17-133516-56.html</link>
	<description>Scooping up science news and dropping it on your desk</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 04:23:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: deanlsinclair</title>
		<link>http://www.sciscoop.com/2008-11-17-133516-56.html/comment-page-1#comment-2279</link>
		<dc:creator>deanlsinclair</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 14:43:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/~arielschwartz/wordpress/sciscoop/?p=3030#comment-2279</guid>
		<description>Re: Dirac&#039;s Constant; etc.&lt;p&gt;
&quot;Honestly he is....&quot; &#160;(interesting, brilliant, right on; &#160;totally insane, a kook ..) mysteries, mysteries!&lt;p&gt;
Anyway, Science Base, thanks for the exposition re Planck&#039;s Constant. I hope it helped the non-physics majors. &lt;p&gt;
The introduction of &quot;h-bar, &quot; &#160;Planck&#039;s Constant divided by 2Pi , also known as &quot;Dirac&#039;s Constant, is. to me, a confusion factor, adding another layer of scientific/mathematical jargon. &#160; To use it one would have to switch from cycles per second to radians per second to get equivalent energy expressions. &#160;One would have to have taken math. thru analytic geometry to understand the radian notation, and &#160;even if they have a knowledge of it, probably most, myself included, are not totally comfortable with the notation. &#160; &#160;&lt;p&gt;
In any case, whether one writes, &#160;&quot;torque times angular velocity (in radians/sec.) &#160;equals Dirac&#039;s Constant times frequency in the same measurement,equals Energy&quot; or one writes, &quot;mass times radius (which is torque) times tangential velocity equals Planck&#039;s Constant times frequency in cycles per second, equals Energy,&quot; &#160;both mean the same thing. &#160;Both also ignore the factor of the speed of light, &quot;c,&quot; the underlying &quot;carrier frequency.&quot; &#160;&lt;p&gt;
One important thing that is overlooked in both expressions is the presence of the &quot;mass times radius&quot; factor of torque. the push or pull of one unit against another. If one looks closely at the parent submission &#160;to &#160;which we are &#160;adding comment, we see that both expressions describe what may well be a universe populated by a &quot;family&quot; of constant-torque, constant-rotational-velocity oscillators having a basic torque value of &quot;h/c.&quot; &lt;p&gt;
This idea will be explored more in an up-coming submission, &quot;Quantization--A &#160;3-D Merry-go-round?&quot; Which should appear in the next few weeks on &quot;this station,&quot; and also on &#160;&lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.google.com/group/oscillatorsubstance-theory&quot;&gt;http://groups.google.com/group/oscillatorsubstance-theory&lt;/a&gt;. &#160; &#160;&lt;br&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: Dirac&#8217;s Constant; etc.
<p>
&#8220;Honestly he is&#8230;.&#8221; &nbsp;(interesting, brilliant, right on; &nbsp;totally insane, a kook ..) mysteries, mysteries!</p>
<p>
Anyway, Science Base, thanks for the exposition re Planck&#8217;s Constant. I hope it helped the non-physics majors. </p>
<p>
The introduction of &#8220;h-bar, &#8221; &nbsp;Planck&#8217;s Constant divided by 2Pi , also known as &#8220;Dirac&#8217;s Constant, is. to me, a confusion factor, adding another layer of scientific/mathematical jargon. &nbsp; To use it one would have to switch from cycles per second to radians per second to get equivalent energy expressions. &nbsp;One would have to have taken math. thru analytic geometry to understand the radian notation, and &nbsp;even if they have a knowledge of it, probably most, myself included, are not totally comfortable with the notation. &nbsp; &nbsp;</p>
<p>
In any case, whether one writes, &nbsp;&#8221;torque times angular velocity (in radians/sec.) &nbsp;equals Dirac&#8217;s Constant times frequency in the same measurement,equals Energy&#8221; or one writes, &#8220;mass times radius (which is torque) times tangential velocity equals Planck&#8217;s Constant times frequency in cycles per second, equals Energy,&#8221; &nbsp;both mean the same thing. &nbsp;Both also ignore the factor of the speed of light, &#8220;c,&#8221; the underlying &#8220;carrier frequency.&#8221; &nbsp;</p>
<p>
One important thing that is overlooked in both expressions is the presence of the &#8220;mass times radius&#8221; factor of torque. the push or pull of one unit against another. If one looks closely at the parent submission &nbsp;to &nbsp;which we are &nbsp;adding comment, we see that both expressions describe what may well be a universe populated by a &#8220;family&#8221; of constant-torque, constant-rotational-velocity oscillators having a basic torque value of &#8220;h/c.&#8221; </p>
<p>
This idea will be explored more in an up-coming submission, &#8220;Quantization&#8211;A &nbsp;3-D Merry-go-round?&#8221; Which should appear in the next few weeks on &#8220;this station,&#8221; and also on &nbsp;<a href="http://groups.google.com/group/oscillatorsubstance-theory">http://groups.google.com/group/oscillatorsubstance-theory</a>. &nbsp; &nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: </title>
		<link>http://www.sciscoop.com/2008-11-17-133516-56.html/comment-page-1#comment-1735</link>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 05:50:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/~arielschwartz/wordpress/sciscoop/?p=3030#comment-1735</guid>
		<description>Planck&#039;s constant (h) defines the size of quanta and so plays a key role in quantum mechanics. It is named for Max Planck, a pioneer of quantum theory. It relates the energy, E, of a photon and its frequency &quot;nu&quot;. h has &quot;dimensionality&quot; of mass multiplied by length squared divided by time.

Divide the Planck constant divided by 2pi and you get h-bar, the &quot;reduced Planck constant&quot; which has the same dimensionality (units essentially) as angular momentum and is used when instead of oscillation (i.e. waves and their frequency) one is discussing rotation in radians per second (rad/s), angular frequency in other words.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Planck&#8217;s constant (h) defines the size of quanta and so plays a key role in quantum mechanics. It is named for Max Planck, a pioneer of quantum theory. It relates the energy, E, of a photon and its frequency &#8220;nu&#8221;. h has &#8220;dimensionality&#8221; of mass multiplied by length squared divided by time.</p>
<p>Divide the Planck constant divided by 2pi and you get h-bar, the &#8220;reduced Planck constant&#8221; which has the same dimensionality (units essentially) as angular momentum and is used when instead of oscillation (i.e. waves and their frequency) one is discussing rotation in radians per second (rad/s), angular frequency in other words.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
