A New Aspect of Planck's Constant

Scientific Paper
Title	A New Aspect of Planck's Constant
Read in full	Link to paper
Author(s)	Milos Abadzic
Keywords	Planck's Constant
Published	2008
Journal	General Science Journal
No. of pages	14

Read the full paper here

Abstract

Determination of Planck's constant had to a great extent, a factual characteristic, like determining the speed of light. Some terms and values which were obtained, reflected real relations although the scientists were unaware of the characteristics and mechanisms of the processes involved. From today's point of the view, we cannot determine the extent of their knowledge from the erroneous hypotheses and theories which appeared later. The physical and the mathematical models presented, disturb the coherence of the real physical appearances and processes - merely confusing the understanding of what happens in nature. In this article, I have attempted (and I believe successfully to a great extent,) to take advantage of Planck constants for determining the characteristics of one of the sub-elemental magnitudes. The analysis is limited to elektrions, but would presumably apply to all other particle systems, with a certain degree of freedom in systems connected with elastic interactions. One of the important results of this analysis is that the carriers of electromagnetic processes are particles with electrical charges that are less than the charges of electrons and quarks. These data refute the theories associated with the Standard model which it seeks to correct. The purpose is not in introducing many smaller particles, but to point out the need to reassess theories that rely on the Standard model, such as the theory of relativity and quantum physics. From this analysis, there ensues some new approaches mentioned in the conclusions at the end of this article.

Overview

Abadžić writes from within his own "NMN model" (Naturalistic Model of Nature), developed across a series of General Science Journal papers, and this article applies that model to Planck's constant. The model populates space with sub-elemental charged particles — elektrions, of two polarities called pozions and negions (elsewhere pozels and negels) — alternately and evenly distributed so that space is macroscopically neutral. This medium he is explicit about naming: "I name this substance the ether, but now it has quite a definite and unambiguous character." Electromagnetic waves are not the propagation of anything through this medium but a disturbance relayed elastically from elektrion to elektrion, each returning to equilibrium after being displaced.

The paper makes two claims that would be substantial if sustained. The first is dimensional: Abadžić argues that h as conventionally used has the dimensions of energy per unit time, so that E = hf actually yields a power, and that the constant is properly the energy emitted in one period rather than in one second. The second is structural: by matching the energy of a wave computed from h against the energy of an accelerated charge computed from classical electrodynamics, he extracts a charge and a radius for the elektrion, obtaining a charge roughly 2.29 × 10¹⁹ times smaller than the electron's. Since these carriers are smaller than any constituent in the Standard Model, he concludes that "the limit of indivisibility is shifted many orders of magnitude" and that theories resting on the Standard Model — including relativity and quantum theory — need reassessment.

The argument

The dimensional objection to E = hf

Abadžić's opening move is to reinterpret h as the time-average of a sinusoidal power function h(t) with maximum h_m and the frequency of the wave in question. Integrating that function over one period gives the energy actually emitted in that period, and this integral, he finds, comes out constant regardless of frequency — which he takes as the mathematical content of Planck's postulate. The peak value h_m is then proportional to frequency.

From this he presses the objection that hf has units of energy divided by time, that is, watts. "Formally observed, the energy, whether it becomes this value through the frequency of some EMW, represents the energy this wave has for a unit of time. Accordingly a definition of this magnitude goes under the name of power." The correct energy over an interval, he argues, is obtained by summing (5) over the number n of complete periods elapsed, so E = hf is usable only when t = 1 s, "because then the power and the energy are numerically adequate but not physically." He notes that because a wave process must terminate in a re-established balance, the number of periods is always an integer, which is why the discrepancy has never shown up in measurement.

Matching wave energy to particle motion

The core calculation compares two expressions for the same energy. On the electrodynamic side, the energy of a moving charge is written as a function of the vacuum permeability μ₀, the elektrion charge e_e, its speed v and its radius r_e. Since charge and radius are constants, this collapses to W = K_vv², which Abadžić notes is formally the classical kinetic-energy expression with K_v playing the role of "an equivalent electrical mass for the elektrion".

The elektrion's motion during a wave is taken to be sinusoidal within each quarter period: speed rises from zero to a maximum v_m at T/4, then falls to zero at T/2 as the system's reaction balances the imparted momentum. Taking the effective (root-mean-square) speed over that quarter period gives a quarter-period energy of (1/8)K_vv_m²/f, and four times that — a full-period energy of (1/2)K_vv_m²/f. Setting this equal to the Planck energy per period gives

h = (1/2)K_vv_m²/f  →  h·f = (1/2)K_vv_m²

Requiring this to be linear in f forces the relation v_m = f = 1/T, and evaluating at f = v_m = 1 gives h = ½K_v, so K_v = 2h = 1.3252 × 10^-33.

Extracting the elektrion's charge and radius

With K_v fixed, Abadžić computes the mean speed v_sr = v_m/2 = f/2, the mean acceleration to maximum a_s = 2f³, and the half-path l/2 = 1/(8f). The mean force over that path is computed twice: once energetically, as the wave energy h·f divided by l/2, and once mechanically as F_s = e_e·k_em·a_s, where k_em = 1/(4πε₀) is described as "the coefficient transposition of electrical charges to the mechanical level", making e_e·k_em a "reduced electrical mass" for the elektrion. Equating the two yields the elektrion charge; Coulomb's law then yields the radius of the space filled by that charge.

The result quoted in the text is that the electron contains

N = 1.6021892 × 10^-19 / 6.9892 × 10^-39 = 2.2924 × 10¹⁹

elektrions. The elektrion charge is thus of order 10^-38 coulomb — some nineteen orders of magnitude below the electron charge and far below any fractional quark charge, which is the basis of the abstract's claim against the Standard Model.

Why light has the speed it has

The last section reinterprets c. Propagation, Abadžić insists, is not transport: "the spread of processes doesn't represent the movement of carriers of these processes in the sense that their locations change, but is just the result of reaction of the system." He states two governing principles. The first is a law of minimal potential energy: every system "longs to occupy a position and arrangement in which its whole potential energy will be minimal", and reacts in proportion to the gap between its current state W_ps and the hypothetical balanced state W_pr. The second is a law of continuity: all changes occupy finite, however short, time intervals, so that "the appearance of singularities by these changes is impossible" — which he offers as grounds for reassessing any model that produces them.

From the first principle he introduces a system time constant τ = 1/k, explicitly not a fixed quantity but dependent on the energetic state. Each elektrion excited by its neighbour responds only after this delay, and the disturbance propagates as a chain of such delays. The speed of the electromagnetic wave is then the product of the time constant and the frequency, "because the time delay happens at the beginning of each new excitation". The frequency-independence of c follows because raising f lowers the factor k_t(t) while raising the number of delayed cycles in the same ratio. Abadžić concludes that c would change only if the density of elektrions in space changed, and takes the constancy of c as evidence for the NMN model.

Conclusions drawn

The paper's own summary lists: that electromagnetic waves arise from oscillation rather than directed motion; that elektrions of both polarities are uniformly distributed over long periods; that h and c are the two experimentally determined sub-elemental constants; the numerical charge and radius derived above; that c is a propagation delay of physical origin dependent on elektrion density; that "utilization of these speeds as limitation magnitudes in the movement of material structures does not have a physical grounding, which questions the fundamental posture of the theory of relativity"; and that "the speed of elektrion oscillatory motion can significantly surpass the value c". A closing footnote confirms that the medium so reconstructed is "formerly denominative ether, but just now it is with quite determined properties."

Assessment

The genuinely interesting element here is the ambition to give h a mechanism rather than a value — to ask what physical process could make the energy radiated per cycle the same at every frequency, rather than accepting it as a postulate. That is a legitimate question, historically the same question that led Planck himself to the second theory of 1911, and Abadžić's reformulation of h as the period-average of a sinusoidal power does correctly reproduce the frequency-independence he wants to explain. His insistence that propagation delays should have a physical seat, and his law of continuity forbidding singularities, are recognisable and defensible instincts in the ether-theoretic tradition. The paper is also honest about its own status, describing its procedure as "relatively simple because it includes only one type of physical particle" and pointing forward to work not yet done.

The difficulties, however, run to the foundations. The dimensional objection is simply mistaken: h has units of joule-seconds, not joules per second, so hf is J·s × s^-1 = J, an energy. Abadžić's argument that E = hf "can be used to t = 1 s only" treats f as a pure count of cycles rather than as a rate, and the whole of section 1.1.2 rests on that slip. Since the reinterpretation of h as a power is what licenses his h(t) function and everything derived from it, the error is load-bearing rather than incidental.

The central derivation contains a second and more serious problem. The step v_m = f equates a speed with a frequency — quantities of different dimensions — and is arrived at by requiring linearity rather than by any physical argument. The subsequent step "in the case where frequency f and speed v_m have a value equal to one" then sets K_v = 2h = 1.3252 × 10^-33 without units, and every downstream number — mean acceleration 2f³, mean force 4hf³, the elektrion charge, the radius — inherits that dimensional indeterminacy. A quantity of order 10^-38 obtained this way cannot be read as a charge in coulombs; what the calculation shows is only that a certain ratio of h to the elementary charge is about 2.3 × 10¹⁹. Presenting that ratio as a particle count is the paper's key inferential leap and it is unsupported.

Against measurement, the sub-elementary charge claim faces a direct and severe obstacle the paper does not mention. Charge quantisation in units of e is not an assumption of the Standard Model but an experimental result: Millikan-type oil-drop measurements, and far more stringently the modern searches for fractional residual charge in bulk matter, exclude free charges below e at the level of one part in 10²¹ per nucleon in some samples. Charges nineteen orders of magnitude smaller, present in the enormous numbers this model requires, would show up in those experiments and in the neutrality of bulk matter. Similarly, the closing claim that elektrion oscillation speeds "can significantly surpass" c is asserted without any derivation from the model's own equations and without engaging any of the tests of Lorentz invariance.

Finally, the paper is hampered as a document. Several of the numbered equations, including those giving the elektrion charge and radius, are set as images that do not survive text extraction, so the reader working from the electronic text can recover the results only by back-calculation from Eq. (33). The English is a translation and is often ambiguous at exactly the points where precision matters most — "weightiness results if the conducted research be situated within an environment that enhances the frequency" is representative. Where a paper's whole case rests on a dimensional argument, that is a costly obscurity, and it makes the work harder to evaluate charitably than its author deserves.

See also

• Milos Abadzic
• Planck Constant
• Aether
• Speed of Light
• Electron
• Standard Model
• General Science Journal