PLANCK’S CONSTANT
Bert Schreiber
4519 Holly St.
Bellaire, TX 77401-5802
charlesbert_99@yahoo.com
ABSTRACT: The German Max Planck (1858-1947) and Nobel Prize recipient in 1919, while
investigating black body radiation arrived at his famous equation, E = hν that solved the problem of the
energy in light (radiation). The energy in ergs was then some function of the frequency times a constant
that was named Planck’s Constant, symbol h. h could only be found from experiment. The fundamental
discovery was that h only occurred by itself and only in whole number multiples of itself, never in
fractional quantities, hence a quantum. What has never been realized since that time, is the significance of
this. Since it only occurred in whole number multiples, then the cycles in the frequency could only be 1
and whole number multiples there on after, never in fractional cycles. This discovery has been violated
over and over by the scientific community and never questioned. That has resulted in many false
scientific beliefs that will be purged.
Due to font problems, the symbols for mass, length, and time will be upper case; M-L-T.
However, these are the correct symbols as the current lower case m, l. t are actually their
numerical value that causes untold problems, not for here. Simply, the correct symbol is for such
as mass, (m)M. Hence, the (m) is understood to be there and is then inserted after the final
equation(s) are used in reality or calculated out for the answer(s).
These numerical values in this paper are in the centimeter-gram-second system (cgs) formerly
the gcs system. The current KMSA Giorgi (rationalized, absolute) system is not used on
purpose. However, by changing the powers in the cgs to the KMSA results in the identical
answers (results) and names, ergs become Joules etc.
DEFINITIONS:
The general consensus in English dictionaries for the definition of the Latin word QUANTUM
is: The SMALLEST unit, value, entity etc. The definition of the word QUANTA is specific; it is
the plural of quantum. Excluding the unit of charge and Planck’s Constant, h, the current
establishment denies that any of the remaining physical constants are quantized.
Therefore, how can there be any of the claimed quantum theories with no quantum in them?
They use quanta illegally also. Since there are no other quantum of mass, length, and time, then
there cannot be any multiples of them, the/a quanta.
1. DISCUSSION:
That h can only be the energy in 1 cycle then meant that the lowest natural limit to frequency can
only be one cycle per second. That meant it was a quantum limit or the start of frequency.
Under current theory due to a false mathematical assumption (frequency doubling; 1/N2), there
was no limit to higher frequencies. Even when experimental evidence showed otherwise, this
belief was still being promulgated. See NOTE (#1).
The next false belief was that there could be a frequency having fractional parts of a cycle, say,
one and a half cycles per second. In theory said one and one-half cycle would have to have 3 h’s
in it. Two in the full cycle and only one h in the half-cycle, or one in the whole cycle and onehalf of h in the fractional cycle. Obviously, both “explanations” are an absurdity.
The next false belief was on examining Planck’s Equation, that all radiation production was one
second in duration. Such was not the case. Radiation from incandescent masses (continuous
radiation) are frequency modulated in the sense each adjoining cycle is one quantum length apart
so that each cycle has one h in it.
Line spectra have a finite production time and a finite wavetrain length. This will be discussed
later. That meant, each cycle in this wavetrain had more than one h in it. The total h’s, per
Planck’s Equation, were divided equally among the fewer cycles. Radio frequencies showed
these multiples of h’s likewise per cycle.
What was taught long ago and is no longer taught, is that E = hν (1) is a mathematical/physical
shortcut to find the total energy for a specific pure frequency. With one exception such does not
really exist, but (1) still works. Proofs cannot be given here and so any arguments that (1) is not
useable is moot and false. Otherwise, the wavetrain length and the h’s per cycle in such would
have to be used etc. See NOTE (#2)
The equation dimensions of h under current theory are: gm-cm2-sec-1. An erg’s dimensions are
gm-cm2. This the force in dynes (the static force) transformed to the effect of the force that is
called kinetic energy. So that for one second (moving one gram one centimeter in (per) one
second against the force), it becomes gm-cm2-t-1. Frequency is 1/T so that h is then gm-cm x cm
x 1/T , that per second, giving the dimensions of h as gm-cm2-sec-1. That is not, gm-cm-cm-ν x ν
or ν2.
In case this is not clear, note that both sides of the Planck Equation must be equal and the
dimensions cancel out leaving 1 = 1. Hence, h = gm-cm2-t-1 x number of cycles (frequency
count) leaves gm-cm2-t-1. Then those ergs can cause an action or effect resulting in an effect.
This them makes h a/the unit of action or effect and its dimensions as so currently spoken and
written. However, that word “unit” is actually a quantum (minimum and smallest value) that is
an anathema to scientists, so is suppressed and forbidden to be used in any and all current
scientific works of any nature.
Since h only occurred in whole numbers, then those dimensions had to go up in jumps or in some
quantum values likewise. This was totally unacceptable to the establishment since all current
theories have the postulate that there are no limits and furthermore the current accepted
fundamental “units” of the universe, mass, length, and time can be infinitely small or approach
zero, if not, even go to zero in some theories.
2
2. BELIEFS DESTROYED:
As a result of the author’s works, it was found that there were limits to measurement for mass,
length, and time. These were the smaller values of those units and their larger values that were
fixed multiples of the smaller. These fixed multiples were called a quanta. It was then only
necessary to insert those values in the dimensions for h and solve. The masses used were the
proton and electron. The smallest lengths were the diameter of the particles, its Compton
Wavelengh, and its wavelength when transformed to radiation all one and the same. The largest
length was the length light goes (not the speed that is the per second) in one second as Lc whose
numerical value is identical to its speed.
A. Calculating h.
Mp = mass of particle
Dp = diameter (L) of particle c = speed of light (L/T)
h = Mp x Dp x c (2) [h = M-L-c (3)]
#1: For the electron:
h = 9.1095 . . x 10-28 x 2.4263 . . x 10-10 x 2.9979 . . x 1010 = 6.6261 . . . x 10-27
#2: For the current proton’s “mass” (a.m.u. can be used likewise giving identical answer):
h = 1.6726 . . x 10-24 x 1.3214 . .x 10-13 x 2.9979 . . x 100 = 6.6261 . . . x 10-27
#3:However, what is the smallest? The largest “diameter” would be that of Lc (length only light
goes in or during one second, not its speed) and substituting to find its mass results in: h =
7.3726 . . .x 10-48 x 2.9979 . . x 1010 x 2.9979 . . x 1010 = 6.6261 . . . x 10-27. This mass is the
smallest mass or what is called a free neutrino. See NOTE (#3).
ν:
B. E = Mc2 = hν
Now especially note that the units in h that give this are: M x L x L/T vs. Einstein’s that are: ML/T-L/T or ML2(T2)-1. It has one too many units of time (1/T) and that is why currently
Einstein’s Equation cannot be directly equated to Planck’s Equation. In reality there are
identical. A critical word is missing. It is because of how each is written. When Einstein’s is
written as: E = M-L-c-1/T (4), then 1/T is the mechanical frequency, ν, that results in E = hν. (1)
from (3). Einstein’s equation, E = Mc2 (5) is currently classical, hence 1/T is frequency. Simply,
2
E (really h) ν = Mc . (6) M = h/Lc (7) requires no ν. Note (#7) also calculates the quantum of
mass and is the second (author has at least 5 more means to do so) proof of the quantum of mass.
The problem is and was that the E (is actually h) in both (1) and (4)(5) should be number (n) of
h’s or nE so both sides of the equation match up. That E can be anything from one h to multiple
h’s. What is missing is both of the E’s are not just energy as spoken and read, but is the TOTAL
energy nh = ET (8), hence hν. Therefore both should be (and equation properly written) as;
2
ET = Mc = hν (9) and spoken as: The total energy is equal to mass times the speed of light
squared or Planck’s Constant times the frequency. Simply, E = Mc2 and E = hν can be derived
from one and the other with equal ease.
3
3. A NEW DISCOVERY, SWEEP AREA:
But there is one fundamental fact that every scientist has not discovered. What is the second
dimension in that of h? It is cm2 and that is length x length and that is area. No matter what
(ir)rationalizations the scientists come up with, there is no way to claim otherwise that length x
length (cm) is not cm2 or area. If that was not so, then length x length x length is not a volume or
area x length is not a volume. What this area is and its significance requires many more
discoveries; many totally unacceptable to the establishment.
Furthermore, there is now two new quantum, area (A) or L2 and volume (V) or L3, making a total
of 5, not three as current. Brevity prohibits any proofs but there is no such thing as mass x mass
or time x time. It is/are their numerical values that are multiplied, that (m) and (t) and that is why
the comment as it caused “untold problems” previously set forth.
Therefore, h is some mass moving (a speed) through or creating some area during an elapsed
time of one second.
2
For the electron, L = λ x c (10) this is then 7.27389(4) cm /sec. This Sweep Area (SA) is then a
constant: SAe = h/Me. (11) This is the fixed area swept out by the de Broglie wavelength of the
electron at any steady or varying speed and in conjunction with any singular or compound path
shape length in one, two or three dimensions, i.e., in a straight line, zigzag, circle, elliptical,
spiral, helix (corkscrew) or random (chaotic) configuration in one second. Furthermore, since no
mass can go to zero speed, then the electron and proton must have reached some quantum of
speed and their lowest temperature. They can go no slower as such would result in a position of
absolute rest that is impossible. Hence, at this quantum speed both have the identical quantum of
temperature, the start of temperature and emit no black body radiation. See NOTE (#4)
(10) also holds true for radiation and is a rectangular area. It is not a fixed value but also has
limits that are not part of this discussion.
Extremely briefly, when this Sweep Area is divided by the electron’s Compton Wavelength etc.
the result is the value for the speed of light, L/T, from (2) that is an obvious result.. When the
Sweep Area is divided by the Compton Wavelength squared the result is the value for the
frequency of the electron when transformed to radiation, i.e., 1/T. That means frequency is just a
number as A/A = a number or ratio. This new discovery of the Sweep Area and the resulting
equations were the clues to how the physical constants can be defined and derived using the
author’s new equations and then just pen and paper.
This Sweep Area for both the de Broglie wave and for radiation is the one missing fundamental
physical constant that the author named Quantum Time, symbol tq. It is the second kind of time
in the Universe. Simply, nh = ET = Mtq (12) and that tq is the one second or sets same (the one
second of time now exists) and so the per second now in the dimensions of h is no longer
required. And Einstein’s Equation is likewise eliminated or can be discarded. See NOTE (#5)
The end of temperature will be when the proton is going one quantum of the smallest measurable
length (its diameter) under Lc (Lc - L quantum) per second. These revelations on temperature
require a separate paper.
4
Lastly, the proton cannot be transformed in toto to energy, but must break apart into smaller
masses first as proven from experiments. Neither can or will it self-decay, another belief
destroyed. See NOTE (#6).
But what about the quantum of mass? Its free form must be going at c. That was the one
exception previously mentioned. Therefore, that form is both its slowest and fastest speed. and
that temperature of said radiation is also identical to that of the electron or proton going the
slowest it can go at the start to the measurement of temperature. Also, it must be the source of
mass and gravitational force.
4: FURTHER PROOFS:
Going back to Planck’s Equation, it is obvious that each cycle in the frequency must have only
one h in it.
Examining Einstein’s E = Mc2 (5), then any mass when transformed to energy (radiation) must
result in one free neutrino (or one single cycle having one h). Therefore, the total mass of the
particle divided by either the quantum of mass (source of mass) or reversed, mass of particle
divided by the resulting frequency should be identical. Only the electron is shown.
9.1095 . . . x 10-28 / 7.3726 . . . x 10-48 = 1.2355 . . . x 1020 cyc/sec. and
9.1095 . . . x 10-28 / 1.2355 . . . x 1020 = 7.3726 . . . x 10-48 gm and
7.3726 . . . x 10-48 x 1.2355 . . . x 1020 = 9.1095 . . . x 10-28 gm
This proves beyond any doubts that the neutrino (quantum of mass) is the source of mass or
any/all mass is composed of whole number multiples of the neutrino’s mass. Though it is out
of place here, excluding Lc and the 1 second, the infinity of digits in the remaining values are
due to the usage of the Base 10 number system and errors in the current SI values.
5: HEISENBERG UNCERTAINTY PRINCIPLE:
There are three falsities concerning the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (HUP).
#1: ∆t x ∆E ≈ h (13). No; it is exactly equal to h. The emission time, 1/ν, per the energy in one
cycle = h. A single cycle whose frequency is 1 cyc/sec has one h. When there are 2 cyc/sec, the
time of creation for one cycle is one-half a second and the energy in each cycle is one h etc.
There is/are no probabilities.
#2: Contrary to what one reads, Heisenberg did not use a microscope but a spectroscope to
develop his theory. You cannot base a theory on the operations of a scientific instrument. The
late Dr. Paul Marmet (died in 2005) showed this to be so. See NOTE (#7)
#3: h has nothing to do with the HUP and such is false. Only the final proof from Marmet’s (and
the author’s confirmation) is given here. From the author’s book (works).
5
Whatever the interpretation is, the relation should be written:
∆t . ∆E = k . h
(64-29)
where k is any arbitrary criterion of resolution corresponding to many cycles, one cycle, or a
fraction of a cycle that the detector can resolve. The units of k are cycles. Heisenberg
(consciously or not) assumed that k = 1/2π to fit the resolution of a spectroscope.
The units of k are compatible with the dimensional analysis of E = hν that shows that the units of
h are equals to Joules\ergs .sec/cycle. Using a phase-sensitive detector, the coefficient k can be
experimentally as small as permitted by technology (state-of-the-art). In fact, there is no
fundamental limit.
The uncertainty relationship claimed is uncertain from another point of view. Some scientists
like L. Schiff state that relation is good "within an order of magnitude." Furthermore, Schiff
writes the equation as an approximation using the symbol ~ giving:
h
(64-30)
∆t . ∆E = >
~ 2π
The irrelevance of the Planck Constant h, to radiation Energy:
It is believed that following (64-23), the Planck Constant determines the amount of uncertainty
of energy of radiation. On the contrary, it can be shown that the uncertainty is not a function of
the Planck Constant. Divide both sides of (1) by h, then substitute for E by its value hν. Doing
this does not change the nature of the equation. This gives:
1
h 1
∆hn ∆t h =
(64-31)
2π h
or
1
(64-32)
∆n ∆t =
2π
Equations (64-31) and (64-32) show that the uncertainty relationship does not change at all, even
if the Planck Constant h has a different value. It must be concluded from those that the Planck
Constant is fundamentally irrelevant to the uncertainty relationship, even if those in the past are
accustomed to believing that h appears to determine the amount of uncertainty.
{}
{}
Another observation is related to hidden units. In practice, the unit cycle is overlooked. The
absence of the unit cycle is confusing because, unfortunately, as seen in the case of Heisenberg's
uncertainty relationship, it makes it impossible to detect mixed units, such as cycles and radians,
when they are used in the same equation.
Finally, from (64-23) it can be seen that the units of ∆t . ∆E = h¦2π are:
"cycle . Joule\erg . sec" and not simply "Joule\erg . sec." To avoid confusion, it is essential to
indicate clearly that the units are "cycle . Joule\erg . sec."
So, there is a hidden and arbitrary criterion of resolution in Heisenberg's uncertainty relationship
that means that there is no fundamental physical principle involved.
6
Brevity prohibits the proofs, but from the author’s works what the HUP actually is or says is:
You can only approach a measurement to some final point for the greatest clarity. After
that, any further approach becomes out of focus and cannot be seen. The closer you
go beyond the greatest point of clarity, the further way the solution becomes.
6. QUANTIZING THE CONSTANTS USING h:
It is fully accepted that h is a quantum. Then it is accepted and so set forth in writing in the
BIPM (CODATA) values for the physical constants that h can be given in or converted into
-15
electron volts (eV). This value to its known digits in accuracy is 4.135667 x 10 eV. Therefore
this is and must also be a quantum (from a quantum comes a quantum). In accepted practice
mass is also set to some eV value. The mass of the proton as used by particle physicists is
6
938.2720 x 10 or 938+ MeV as normally shown. Ergo, that mass must likewise be composed of
multiple quantum values or is a quanta.
The conversion is straight forward and is recognized from other methods that results in the
proton’s quanta eV divided by the quantum h eV must be the number of quantum masses in eV.
23
This gives 2.268731 x 10 . That is immediately recognizable as the calculated frequency of the
proton if it could be transformed in toto to energy. This is also exactly that of Planck’s Equation
E = hν. (1)
Then since there are this many quantum of mass in one proton, each mass must be the mass of
the proton divided by this number in quanta of mass. This is then
-24
23
-48
1.672621 x 10 /2.268731 x 10 = 7.3724 x 10 gms the smallest amount of mass.
This is easily confirmed from Planck’s equation or the energy in one single cycle of radiation
having one h of energy. It is further confirmed when this amount of energy is inserted in
2
Einstein’s famous equation to solve for M, that is, M =h/c (7) and gives the identical numerical
answer for M.
Additional proof is to take the rest mass of any particle and divide it by its frequency number if it
is transformed to radiation. For the electron this gives the identical answer to the accuracy for the
mass of the electron. From the proton and electron results, then the quantum of mass must be the
source of mass.
eV can be converted into temperature. This conversion must then be both the start to measurable
temperature and the lowest temperature than can be reached above absolute zero. Doing this
-11
conversion then gives: 4.79904 x 10 K. See NOTE (#8)
At this point this stops.
The development and proofs of ALL the equations and results herein requires hundreds of pages.
Only the end results, for the most part, are given here.
7: FURTHER FALSITIES:
Due to the fact that the current establishment scientists deny that there is any
relationships between the constants etc., such is obviously false.
7
There has been published by many that sometimes in the past that c, G, and h changed since
creation. Even if they changed (and that is impossible) it would make absolutely no difference
what so ever. If any one constant did change, ALL THE OTHERS MUST CHANGE
LIKEWISE. Therefore, nothing would change in the end.
8: CONCLUSIONS:
1. Planck’s Constant is the quantum of action or energy. The amount of energy required to
produce some effect. It is the energy to accelerate or decelerate an electron one of its
diameters per second as an example.
2. All the physical constants can only go up in whole number jumps or their quantum values.
3. It is one means to set the limit to temperature or the start of temperature.
4. It sets the slowest, quantum, speed of the particles.
5. It has nothing to do with Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle; no probabilities, no relation to
h etc.
6. Its numerical value can be found (calculated) from using some of the known physical
constants.
7. It sets the limits to real measurements or experimental detection of any effect. (Marmet was
wrong on that point.)
8. It proved that ET = Mc2 = hν.
9. The L2 in h’s dimensions was the one missing physical constant or Sweep Area that was
named Quantum Time, symbol tq. All particles and all line spectra radiation carries their own
clock and that is the local time we call elapsed time etc. and sets the second of time, it exists.
NOTES:
(#1) Firing electrons against one another shows that at about 210 MeV that the production of the
gamma rays from the “annihilation” ceases and particle production begins. The highest
frequency can only be calculated from the decay of the the pions pio and the Eta. For the pio
the values are: ν = 1.6296 . . . x 1022 cyc/sec and for the Eta
ν = 6.6297 . . . x 1022 cyc/sec.
(#2) Michelson invented a new kind of interferometer named for him. One of its earliest uses
was to measure the wavetrain lengths of various spectrum lines. While so doing, it was
discovered that the interferometer quite working when the arms’ length exceeded that wavetrain
length. It was also found that various close frequencies from different elements had vastly
different wavetrain lengths. From knowing the wavetrain length, the time it took to produce this
line could be easily calculated. In general it was about x 10-10 seconds. Then, how many cycles
were in this wavetrain could be calculated. Then the total energy of that particular frequency
meant that each cycle must have many h’s in each cycle. Then if this smaller number of cycles
was stretched out to those in that length Lc and the energy divided up in these added cycles, then
each will have one h in it. That is what Planck’s Equation says. Planck’s Equation does not say
(though it could possibly happen) that every wavetrain is one second long in reality.
Work on the photoelectric effect, especially using sodium vapor, had measured the production
time. Due to the state of the art at that time (late 1800’s) and later, the values agreed.
8
Einstein when doing his monumental work on the photoelectric effect, was aware of these prior
works (The Michelson interferometer contribution is unknown.) He developed an equation
(actually two) that permitted the calculation of the oscillation time for an electron to lose its
energy to create a spectrum line. Subsequent experiments confirmed his equation.
All of these discoveries have been removed from the vast majority of all current references,
textbooks, mentions in papers etc. Why? Because they give lie to many of the false beliefs taught
and promulgated by the current establishment. One such is the current massless photon. Absurd
claims for Young’s double-slit experiment using light and particles, diffraction patterns, and on
and on.
(#3) The quantum of time is the time it takes for light to go across the diameter of the proton.
This was first proposed by Werner Heisenberg (1901-1976). The quantum of length was first
proposed by George Gamow (1904-1968).
(#4) As a side issue equating h = h permits the de Broglie Equation to be derived. The de Broglie
Equation is just the dimensions of h = h put into equation format that is: λd = h/Mv. Then as h
it is: h = M x λd x v and when v = c it gives the generic equation of: h = M x L x c.
(#5) This is about as close to defining energy, mass and one of the kinds of time that is the local
time as we will probably ever get or each in terms of the other. M = E/tq and tq = E/M.
(#6) Firing protons against antiprotons produced nothing but other particles with no production
of gamma radiation from the collision(s). Simply, they did not annihilate, but broke apart first
upon collision (soft) producing other known or postulated particles. At increased collision speeds
they then started producing other known particles (pions) as per the “speed” limit of the electron
and positron collision. Hence, that marked the end to any production of radiation or the
impossible in toto proton’s mass to energy frequency of 2.26873 x 1023 cyc/sec. Both of these
experiments were conduced at CERN. The full details can be found using a web search, hence no
specific references given. The end results are not acknowledged by the scientific community.
Not a part of this paper, but firing protons against protons only resulted in their bouncing apart
and once the particle production speed reached the creation point, pions were created. Further
speed just produced more particles. This meant the protons were at some very high temperature
and collision “pressure” but they did not fuse together and never can. End of thermofusion theory
or another proven experimental result that must be ignored.
(#7) Paul Marmet’s book can be found on the web and is free under: Absurdities in Modern
Physics: A Solution.
(#8) There has been taught and promulgated that there is/are no connection(s) between or among
the various fundamental and secondary physical constants What now follows will destroy this
falsity.
This was the means I did so over 50 years ago plus I predicted my derived and defined values but
it took another 35+ years to prove them. I used the values available then but the following uses
the current values.
9
It is only necessary to list the current known numerical values of mass, length, and time in two
columns. In the first are the smallest values that was without the quantum of mass. In the second
are the largest values. Due to limitations of both the English and Latin language, a word’s usage
(definition) must be changed. That word is quanta.
From its original definition, a large value like the quantum to a fixed multiple of the quantum
values. Excluding quantum mass and time (currently missing), the current SI values shown are
shortened for brevity.
TABLE 1
Mass
Length*
Time
QUANTUM
7.37261 x 10-48
1.32140 x 10-13
4.40774 x 10-24
QUANTA
1.67264 x 10-24 (proton) gm
2.99792 x 1010 (Lc) cm
1
sec
* This is the experimentally measured diameter of the proton within the state of the art, its
Compton Wavelength (its calculated de Broglie wavelength if it could go to the speed of light),
and its wavelength if it could be transformed in toto to energy. Those are a/the connection(s).
Now what is the ratio between the quanta and quantum values? This is 2.26873 x 1023 for each
one. This is called the Quanta Ratio. What is this value? It is the calculated frequency for the
proton if it could be transformed in toto into light. This is a definite connection beyond question.
It was then only necessary to apply this ratio to the quanta of mass to find the quantum as shown.
And so, it has been shown that the fundamental constants are specifically related to one another
and that means, all the other constants derived therefrom are likewise related.
Therefore the quantum of mass is the proton’s mass divided by the Quanta Ratio. Its value can be
further calculated using Einstein’s equation and 5 more means the author discovered. Two others
have since found this value also using the identical means the author did.
Therefore, time is not continuous but consists of connected quantum jumps of time. And, since
this is so, then the Theory of Relativity is false as this destroys no simultaneity for starters. It
likewise explains how lasers actually operate. and why there are too many other false beliefs to
even start to list.
With a very few rare exceptions, every belief/postulate/experimental results etc. in the Classical
Theory and The Theory of Relativity (SRT and GRT) are no longer true. For all purposes both
have been destroyed. They will have to be replaced with a new theory of LIMITS to
measurement (QUANTUM-QUANTA) and a new mathematics that the author calls Segmatics
or the usage of finite segments of that finite quantum physical length as its geometrical and
mathematical foundation, i.e., no more “points” anything.
June 2005
Revised October 2006
10