Dimension of length using h,G,c

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around determining the dimension of length using the constants Planck's constant (h), the gravitational constant (G), and the speed of light (c). Participants are exploring the relationships between these constants and their respective dimensions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants attempt to express the dimension of length in terms of h, G, and c, while others question the validity of their dimensional analysis. There is a discussion about the need to reduce parameters to a standard set of dimensions (M, L, T) and the implications of distinguishing between different variables such as "r" and "L".

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging in the problem, with some offering guidance on how to approach the dimensional analysis. There is a recognition of the need to clarify the dimensions of the constants involved, and multiple interpretations of the problem are being explored without a clear consensus.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of differing approaches to the problem, with some participants feeling that converting dimensions into the standard set may not be necessary. The discussion reflects a variety of assumptions about the relationships between the constants and their dimensions.

Pushoam
Messages
961
Reaction score
53

Homework Statement


upload_2017-12-26_18-39-6.png


Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


Dimension of length using h,G,c

[h] = [F r]

##[G] =[ \frac { Fr^2}{m^2} ]

\\ [\frac { hG}c] = [L] ##

So, the answer is option (b).

Is this correct?
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-12-26_18-39-6.png
    upload_2017-12-26_18-39-6.png
    6.5 KB · Views: 1,507
Physics news on Phys.org
Mistake: [h ] ## \neq ## [Fr]

[h] = [mv r]

[L] = [ ## \sqrt{ \frac { hG}{c^3}}] ##

Is this correct?
 
Keep guessing & if we say 'yes' or 'no' you'll eventually hit it, won't you?
So rather than answer 'yes' or 'no' we prefer that you show how you arrived at your answer.
BTW why do you distinguish "r" from "L"? They're the same. For example, [G] =M-1L3T-2 etc. , don't need the "r". In SI (mks) there are only 4 dimensions, to wit, M,L,T and Q. (In cgs there are only the first three).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Pushoam
Pushoam said:
Is this correct?
Yes, but as rude man says your working would be clearer if you were to first reduce all the parameters to the standard set M, L, T... and introduce unknowns for the exponents of tne parameters.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Pushoam
rude man said:
Keep guessing & if we say 'yes' or 'no' you'll eventually hit it, won't you?
So rather than answer 'yes' or 'no' we prefer that you show how you arrived at your answer.
BTW why do you distinguish "r" from "L"? They're the same. For example, [G] =M-1L3T-2 etc. , don't need the "r". In SI (mks) there are only 4 dimensions, to wit, M,L,T and Q. (In cgs there are only the first three).
I felt that I could solve the question without converting the dimensions into M,L,T. So, I went that way. I had the impression that that approach is faster. It may be that this impression is wrong.
I think you are suggesting me to do the following way:
I should write dimensions of G, h, c in M,L, T respectively.
And then I should solve the following dimensional equation.
[L] = ##[G]^p[h]^q [c]^r ##
I will get one equation for each dimension. This will give me the values of p,q,r. Thus I will reach the answer.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K