Alexander~E=hv
- 5
- 0
Every time i see it it's different. I want the full Planck constant(every number) and is there any proof for the constant?
The discussion revolves around the Planck constant, including its value, variations in representation, and the existence of proofs supporting its validity. Participants express confusion over the consistency of the constant's representation and seek clarification on its precise value and the nature of its proofs.
Participants generally agree that the exact representation of the Planck constant can vary and that no one knows every digit due to measurement constraints. However, there is no consensus on the existence of discrepancies in its value across different sources, as some participants assert that they found no disagreement in popular sources.
Some limitations include the dependence on the units used for the Planck constant and the unresolved nature of the request for a definitive proof of its value. The discussion also reflects uncertainty about the sources of perceived discrepancies in the constant's representation.
Nobody can comply with your request because nobody knows every digit - nobody can measure that accurately.Alexander~E=hv said:Every time i see it it's different. I want the full Planck constant(every number) and is there any proof for the constant?
Ah I missed the "whole digit thing". Yeah, I agree with Simon! There isn't someone who actually knows every digit of the Planck constant.Simon Bridge said:Nobody can comply with your request because nobody knows every digit - nobody can measure that accurately.
You can look up the standard value online. I don't know of sources disagreeing, can you supply an example?
There are many proofs for the constant - you can look those up too.
Do you have reason to suspect that it may not be?