Issue with mass in de Broglie wave

theChosen1
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
I was looking for a frequency by calculating the wavelength, and I found the answer. However, I have no idea where I came up with one of the values!

my notes say:
wavelength = Planck Constant / (proton mass * velocity)

My values:

1.9078e-21 m = 6.63e-034 / (2.81e-8 * 1.236e-5)

The velocity is equal to longest wavelength of the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the hydrogen atom undergoing a transition from the n = 7 level, shown in m/s. The Planck Constant is what it is.

But what was I thinking when I came up with the mass of a proton as 2.81e-8?! Here's the thing THE NUMBER WORKS. And when I came up with that one, I was like, "Okay, we'll just call that 'proton mass' for now and see what happens."

I'm sure it had something to do with charge and/or angular momentum.

Does anyone know what I was thinking?! Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
theChosen1 said:
The velocity is equal to longest wavelength of the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the hydrogen atom undergoing a transition from the n = 7 level, shown in m/s

What.

Also, hydrogen levels are dealing with the electron. What exactly are you calculating?
 
wotanub said:
What exactly are you calculating?

Upper and lower controls based on frequency and L/C resonance. This is a real Frankenstein project, so values are coming from everywhere.
 
Nothing to see here folks. In fact, you may lock the thread if you like...

It was a hypothetical that I was working with to arrive at a working number at 3:00am: the hypothetical "weight" of a PHOTON, not a PROTON.

Like I said, "Frankenstein Project".
 
I understand that the world of interpretations of quantum mechanics is very complex, as experimental data hasn't completely falsified the main deterministic interpretations (such as Everett), vs non-deterministc ones, however, I read in online sources that Objective Collapse theories are being increasingly challenged. Does this mean that deterministic interpretations are more likely to be true? I always understood that the "collapse" or "measurement problem" was how we phrased the fact that...
I would like to know the validity of the following criticism of one of Zeilinger's latest papers https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2507.07756 "violation of bell inequality with unentangled photons" The review is by Francis Villatoro, in Spanish, https://francis.naukas.com/2025/07/26/sin-entrelazamiento-no-se-pueden-incumplir-las-desigualdades-de-bell/ I will translate and summarize the criticism as follows: -It is true that a Bell inequality is violated, but not a CHSH inequality. The...
I keep reading throughout this forum from many members that the general motivation for finding a deeper explanation within QM, specifically with regards to quantum entanglement, is due to an inability to grasp reality based off of classical intuitions. On the other hand, if QM was truly incomplete, and there was a deeper explanation that we haven't grasped yet that would explain why particles tend to be correlated to each other seemingly instantly despite vast separated distances, then that...
Back
Top