Solving the Equation: \hbar c = Gm^2

  • Thread starter Thread starter coolSmith
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the equation \(\hbar c = Gm^2\) and its manipulation to explore potential implications in physics. Participants are examining the dimensional consistency and the physical significance of the derived equations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to manipulate the equation through algebraic steps, raising questions about dimensional correctness and the validity of their derivation. Other participants question the purpose and implications of the derived equations, particularly in relation to physical concepts like momentum and spin.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with some participants expressing uncertainty about the dimensional analysis and the physical relevance of the results. There is no explicit consensus on the correctness of the derivation, but various interpretations and applications are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention concerns about dimensional analysis and the implications of the derived equations, indicating a need for clarity on these aspects. The original poster seeks validation of their approach, while others are considering broader applications of the results.

coolSmith
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



Seems pretty strightforward:
\hbar c = Gm^2

multiply both sides by c^4

\hbar c^5 = Gm^2c^4

knowing that m^2c^4 is E^2=(\hbar \omega)^2 then

\hbar c^5 = G\hbar^2 \omega^2

dividing \hbar^2 off both sides

\frac{c^5}{\hbar}=G\omega^2

then this is the same as

\frac{c^5}{\hbar}=G\frac{k}{m}

because \omega^2 = \frac{k}{m} so multiplying m on both sides gives

\frac{c^5}{\hbar}m=Gk

Then finally multiplying \hbar on both sides gives you

\frac{c^5}{\hbar}m \hbar=Gk\hbar

Has there been anything wrong in this so far?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Basically it was suggested I had my dimensions wrong, but the derivation is so simple, I couldn't see anything wrong with. My question was simple enough I think.. is there anything wrong with it? Either it is wrong and I am doing this with the wrong dimensions, or it is right and there was no problem to begin with..

which is it, please answer!
 
What does this derivation do ? What's it good for ?
 
I haven't fully decided on this. There are two main features from the final equation written here in the OP.

\frac{c^5}{\hbar}M\hbar = G(k\hbar)

which in another form is simply

\frac{c^5}{\hbar}S = G(k\hbar)

This equation has the features that the left handside is in fact just a rescalling of the spin S and the right handside has the feature of momentum of any quanta given as (\hbar k). So for a specific wave equation, the right hand side may have an implication for

\psi(x,t) = Aexp(ikx - i \hbar k2t / 2m)

because this has a definite momentum, p = ħk. But because this has the form of spin on the left handside, it can be futher written as

\frac{c^5}{\hbar} \frac{\hbar}{2} \sigma_i = G(\hbar k)

Here \sigma_i is the Pauli Spin Matrices, where the subscript represents any of the three dimensions of space \sigma_i = (\sigma_x, \sigma_y, \sigma_z) and of course, if you use all three dimensions, this directly effects the momentum component to make (\vec{\hbar k}).

Of course, I have thought about other applications.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K