Reduced Planck's constant and Planck's constant?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Numeriprimi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Constant
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The reduced Planck's constant, denoted as ℏ, is defined as the original Planck's constant (h) divided by 2π. This distinction is primarily a matter of notation and convenience, as using ℏ simplifies equations in quantum mechanics. While it is common to express the Planck length using the reduced Planck constant, it is also acceptable to use the original Planck constant without any issues. The choice between these constants does not affect the underlying physics but rather streamlines calculations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Planck's constant (h)
  • Familiarity with the concept of reduced Planck's constant (ℏ)
  • Basic knowledge of quantum mechanics
  • Mathematical proficiency in handling equations involving constants
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the applications of the reduced Planck constant in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the significance of Planck length in theoretical physics
  • Study the role of constants in simplifying physical equations
  • Learn about other fundamental constants and their relationships
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those focusing on quantum mechanics and theoretical physics, will benefit from this discussion.

Numeriprimi
Messages
135
Reaction score
0
Hello,
is there anyone who can explain me difference between the reduced Planck's constant and Planck's constant? SIMPLY. I know equation between this but... I don't understand it.

If I express the Planck's length by √(hG/c), it is bad? There have to be reducet Planck's constant, bud why?

Thanks very much,
sorry for my bad English
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The reduced Planck Constant is just the original divided by ##2\pi##. There is no meaning. Since the equations often turned up with this factor dividing the constant, ##\hbar## is often used to simplify notation.
 
To add to what DrewD said (which is correct) also note that it would not be bad to define the Planck length in terms of the Planck constant instead of the reduced Planck constant. We chose to use the reduced constant instead of the plain Planck constant for the convenience of simpler equations, but it is still just a convention. Other choices are not bad.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
855
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K