Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Physics Forum History of the "quantum of action" (1900-1927)

History of the "quantum of action" (1900-1927) / by Socratus /
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.

For practical uses both Planck and Einstein multiplied
"quantum of action" by frequency : E=hf.
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 1924 Pauli discovered that "the quantum of action" must obey
"the exclusion principle".
g)
In 1925 Heisenberg went a step further.
He discovered "the uncertainty principle" (HUP): Et>h*, px>h*.
h)
In the same 1925 year Schrodinger explained that
de Broglie's "pilot-wave" can work as "psi-wave function".
i)
In 1926 Schrodinger found relation between his "psi-wave
function" and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
j)
In 1926 Born showed that could be probability of finding
the "quant of action" in local place of the "psi-wave function".
k)
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 /
==…

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?
In 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
==..
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.
==. .

When h is allowed to be zero - uncertainty goes to zero and were classical.
But the real question is why does there have to be a non zero h ?

I believe if you follow through, you will see that a non zero h, equates to the non existence of any system. The system must have the freedom to loose its energy, disperse its energy, entropy to its environment, or its existence is compromised.

If anybody is on this wavelength - get back to me here to discuss.

Hi RWK, welcome to SAGG.



The logic of that eludes me, could you say a bit more about the reasoning?