Measure Planck's constant without universal constants

Heisenberg_white
Messages
3
Reaction score
3
Homework Statement
Suggest a method to measure h (Planck's constant) without using the value of any other universal constant.
Relevant Equations
h = 6.626e-34
I am not getting any ideas to solve this without the universal constants. The method that I want to use invloves the speed of light, which is a universal constant.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Thanks a lot for replying!
In the experiment, we used LEDs emitting different colors & found out their barrier potentials, from which we calculated the Planck's constant. Energy, E = eV = hν ( where, e - energy of an electron; V - barrier potential). from this we get V = hc/eλ. and in turn, h = eVλ/c.
But anyway, none of this is related to the question that I have asked. My question was asked as a supplementary question by my professor. This is just to tell you how the experiment was conducted.

Thank you again! :)
 
  • Like
Likes Charles Link
Is this question asked in the context of the "new SI", i.e., the redefinition of the international system of units through natural constants. Then the answer is in the following Physics Today article:

https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/PT.3.4472

Of course you cannot measure ##h## in the described (gedanken) experiment without referring to ##\nu_{\text{Cs}}## (defining the second) and ##c## (defining, together with the second, the metre). All units are interconnected, starting with ##\nu_{\text{Cs}}## to define the second.
 
  • Like
Likes Heisenberg_white and Charles Link
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top