Pauli's Wave Mechanics text. h vs. hbar

[Peeter]

In this little Dover book "Wave mechanics", by Pauli, it appears to use h for hbar, and includes a footnote right on the very first page

"1. In these lectures we use the symbol h to denote the quantity 1.05 x 10^-34 joule.sec. In the older literature this quantity was usually denoted by \hbar"

However, this is what I've seen in the newer literature too. Are the definitions of these constants in a state of flux?

 

[f95toli]

No, \hbar should always represent Planck's constant divided by 2 pi in modern text.
I don't think I've ever encountered an example where someone has specifically used h instead of \hbar or vice versa. There are, however, examples of texts where the author is ex. ignoring factors of 2pi etc simply because they are interested in order-of-magnitude estimates and factors of the order of one does one matter.

Also, note that formulas where CGS electromagnetic units are used often differ by a factor of 2pi compared to the equivalent formulas in SI (and there are plenty of examples of papers where the authors have added/removed a 2pi too many).

 

[dlgoff]

This brought up a discussion I remembered from a few years ago.
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=73119&highlight=planks+constant"
Regards