Planck’s Constant & Orbital Energy
By: Thomas Lee Abshier, ND
Why is Planck’s Constant the Fundamental Multiple of Orbital Energy?
The electron itself radiates its charge out radially (hence the name radiation).
It conducts its organizing charge out from its center at the speed of light. And,
the other charges of the DP Sea also engage in this same radiative behavior, and
the ì and å of the space govern its transmission rate. The ħ of space is in units
of angular momentum, which indicates that there is a fundamental spin type of motion
that is action that is happening on even the most basic level of the DP. If Planck’s
constant is to be active at that level, then the frequency must be extremely low
when confronting the DP itself. It is as though the larger the collection of mass,
the higher the frequency it corresponds to. Obviously to simply reduce a rock or
ball or car down to the level of a frequency is nonsensical, as though that is the
only aspect of life that it is expressing. But, still, the rock etc. have at some
level a something about them that allows them to be categorized in terms of ħ and
frequency. In the case of the photon, the frequency is obvious how it relates to
the ħ, and in terms to energy. It is likewise obvious how something like an electron
orbital could be strongly related to an energy, and frequency. The puzzling thing
is how Planck’s constant can be the only thing that converts any frequency into energy.
A key into this lock may be that mass of any sort has an aspect that is related
to ħ. Likewise, in the case of the most clearly relevant conversion, between a wave
packet, a photon, and the energy that it holds, the E = h í relationship is relevant
in the most literal sense. If the photon is a half wave, then all the energy of
the photon is packed into half of the wave. The E = h í relationship would appear
to imply a full sine wave relationship between the photon and the frequency. But,
it may not be, because the ħ relationship between energy and frequency works even
though there is nothing that is apparently frequency-related going on at all. So,
the frequency could be an equivalent frequency, if it is not actually relevant to
the physical cyclic process of the energy being described. In other words, the relationship,
E = mc² is one conversion between mass and energy. Likewise, E = h í is another
conversion, and when both of them are referring to the same thing, e.g. a stationary
mass, then h í = m/ìå. Thus, mass has a relationship directly between all these
3 constants of nature, and the one variable that relates them together to produce
the individual expression of mass. Again, the only time this concept of frequency
would be strictly relevant is when mass is equal to something extremely fundamental,
e.g. an electron mass. And, the question we ask is, “what is the relationship to
the amount of energy that it delivers in a second (given that the ħ units are joule-sec)?”
Thus, this would imply that the photon is a full wave phenomenon, because empirically
we have evidence that in fact it does have full wave oscillation associated with
its energy. There is thus something that is vibrating in a photon, which is somewhat
obvious. And, there is something that is vibrating in an elementary particle, such
as an electron, which is not terribly obvious. Thus, to really analyze the relevance
of the frequency when using the E = h í equation, we need to use it in the context
where it truly does in some way reflect the underlying processes that are in process.
In the case of the wave, the E = h í is clearly an accurate conversion, because
of the empirical evidence that supports this conversion, e.g. the photoelectric effect.
And, in the case of the debroglie wavelength, where an electron is given a certain
velocity, and it has a certain wavelength because it has that velocity, having converted
itself into a wavelike-structure, and the momentum it carries being the portion of
the phenomena that carries the wavelike structure, e.g. as seen in the example of
electron microscopy. But, the real question is why the ħ is so strong a factor of
space that it does not allow any other orbital levels, or energy levels, other than
those which are multiples of ħ. And, the answer is that the ħ is the unit of transmission
of energy. There is no smaller unit of transmission of energy, and there are no
other allowable units of transmission, thus, there can be no energies of either photon-wave
or mass/momentum that can be passed through space than this. So, the question is
then, what is the mediator of this energy? The answer has to be that the DPs carry
the energy of the wave or mass. Both the wave, and the mass, are examples of correlation
volumes, in other words the DPs align in the volume of space so as to create a unit
of energy delivery. Apparently the smallest packet of a wave that can be transmitted
is the unit with 1 ħ of angular momentum. The DC wave would not count, because there
was a period of time when the DC wave increased in its amplitude, and the rate of
change of that wave would be equivalent to the energy that was supplied to create
that DC wave. Thus, the amount of energy associated with a wave or a unit of momentum,
is going to be related to the ħ, because ħ is the smallest unit of energy that can
be delivered. This applies to potential energy and to kinetic energy. Potential
energy only happens after having been stored after kinetic energy engages in some
mechanism which is capable of storing that Kinetic energy in some form, as a tension
of some sort. Thus, potential energy is going to be in units of ħ, and while there
may not be a time-type of relationship going on at that moment, there will necessarily
be a precursor energy transaction which will involve a rate of energy transmission.
And, for the concept of the wavelength of a mass to be relevant, it must in some
way be moving. And, in the case of the mass which has formed from pair production,
and it is not moving at all in the absolute frame, and there is nothing more than
the fields of the separated particles, there really is very little relationship that
has anything at all to do with frequency. An equivalent frequency could be computed
knowing the mass, by using the m = h í ì å relationship, but that í even though computed
and known tells little more than the fact that at some level in the creation of the
mass that there was a process that involved a frequency. Thus at this point, the
question is, why does space require this small-packet of energy transmission? And
the answer is that space must at some level have a smallest correlation wave. And,
this would be related to the smallest distance, and the smallest unit of time. If
space moved into correlation this amount, then that would be the equivalent of the
amount of energy associated with Planck’s constant being delivered in one moment.
Thus, to compute out the amount of energy held by the hydrogen atom in its orbital
at the lowest orbital level, this would be equal to the smallest unit of energy that
the universe was capable of holding in organization, and this would be equal to a
single DP moving the smallest unit of distance, over the smallest unit of time. And
while the unit is the unit of angular momentum, it is actual a unit of energy delivered
at a time. Thus, when an orbital forms, it is a coherent entity, just like any other
stable structure that is capable of transmitting energy. In other words, the orbital
was formed from an electron with mass, of a certain kinetic energy, approaching the
nucleus. This nucleus-electron interaction would then have a certain amount of energy
that it carried. That orbital would be the equivalent of having one unit of ħ of
energy that it would deliver in a second. Thus, this is the correlation between
the orbital and the amount of energy it carries, and ħ.
