LIGHT QUANTA AND THE FREQUENCY OF LIGHT By V. Laxmanan, Sc. D.

I recently asked a few friends, who are science and engineering professionals, some of whom have advanced degrees, what they understood by the term energy quantum, as defined in physics. This was to lay the ground for another kind of quantum that we will discuss shortly, after some additional empirical observations become available in the days (following March 17, 2014, the date of this writing), weeks and months ahead.

Red light in

No Electrons

Blue light in

Electrons out

Sodium Metal
Schematic Illustration of the Photoelectric Effect with Sodium Metal
Millikan [1-3] studied the photoelectric effect, with sodium and lithium, in his Nobel Prize winning experiments. No electrons are produced even with very bright red light shining on sodium metal; see http://www.howdoweknowit.com/tag/millikan/ (No matter how bright your red light is, you wont knock any electrons out of the sodium metal [4]. But shine even a weak blue light on it, and immediately, it starts to release electrons). Also, https://www.llnl.gov/str/June05/pdfs/06_05.2.pdf (blue light causes sodium to release electrons, but red light does not [5]).
________________________________________________________________________ Email address: vlaxmanan@hotmail.com The author is a retired research professional, with advanced degrees in Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science and Engineering who has spent his entire professional career in leading US research institutions, in academia ( MIT and CWRU), in government (NASA), and in corporate research labs (Allied Chemical Corporate R & D, now part of Honeywell, and the General Motors Research Labs). He has also published many widely cited scientific articles in leading peer-reviewed international journals in both physics and the materials sciences. His current research interests include the study of business, financial, and economic data using methods commonly used in physics and the hard sciences. This has led him to propose a broad generalization of the Page 1 of 42

Planck-Einstein ideas from quantum physics and their application to financial, economic, business, social, and political, sports and other systems. He has also recently been active in the analysis of the climate data, especially global average temperature data using similar methods (a new physics of global warming) and as recently created a Facebook group called Global Warming for the Layman; see https://www.facebook.com/groups/GWforlayman/, on January 5, 2014, aimed at discussing global warming data in an easy-to-understand manner, with short posts; see also https://www.facebook.com/groups/physicseconomicsandrealworld/

Besides the well-known elementary energy quantum of Planck, there is also an elementary quantum of electrical charge, which was also determined by Millikan in his Nobel Prize winning experiments. Let q denote such an elementary and indivisible unit of charge. If N such indivisible units are attached to a microscopically small oil drop, the total electrical charge on the drop is Q = qN. This will determine the force acting on the drop and hence the velocity with which the drop will move in an electrical field. If the number of units N changes, the total charge Q will change but q = Q/N will remain constant. Here Q is the change in the total electrical charge due to the change in the number of units, N, of the elementary unit. The absolute magnitude of the electrical charge on a single electron, one of the fundamental constants of nature, was determined by Millikan [1, 6-9], in his famous oil drop experiments, by careful measurements of the changes in the velocity of the oil drops in response to changes in Q = qN. The oil drop experiment is still considered to be among the Top 10 most beautiful science experiments [10]. According to Einsteins famous equation, E = mc2, the mass of a body is a measure of its energy content, which is an exact quote from Einsteins 1905 paper [11, 12]; see also Ref. [13]. Thus, the energy content of a body of mass m can be determined by multiplying by c2 where c is the speed of light; see Refs. [14, 15] for the numerical value of c and how it was measured. Hence, if a person weighs 70 kg (or has a body mass of 70 kg), the energy equivalent can be calculated using Einsteins famous equation. Then, it seems that one should be able to tell exactly how many energy quanta a person has since, by definition, the total energy E = N where E is the total energy content is the elementary (and indivisible) energy quantum; see also the remarks attributed to Planck in the centennial review of Plancks paper by Kragh

Page 2 of 42

[16], in December 2000. This is exactly analogous to the equation Q = Nq for the total charge on the electrified oil drop in Millikans experiments.

(Planck and Boses method of deriving the same law) 1. Since E = mc2, can we determine how many indivisible energy quanta each person has? 2. How many tiny ball bearings of mass m will equal the total mass M of a person, if we put both of them on a weighing balance? Is there a unique answer to this question? 3. When we buy a dozen roses, the florist also gives us a small packet of plant food, of 10g quantity. Since plant food is only obtained in 10g packets, can we ever get 5g, or 12 g, or 23 g of plant food? 4. Millikan deduced the absolute magnitude of the electrical charge q on a single electron from his observations on the motions of literally hundreds of microscopically small, electrified, oil drops with the total charge Q = Nq where N is the number of electrons attached to the drop. He showed that a single value of q can be used to explain all of his observations.

WHAT IS A QUANTUM?

What is the energy quantum? What makes the energy quantum indivisible? How many energy quanta does a person have? These questions can be answered but with a slight twist, which can be understood, as follows. For example, I recently picked up a dozen roses and along with it came a small packet of plant food. The label said that the packet weighed 10 grams (10 g). Since I can only get packets of 10g each, I can never get 5g of the plant food, or
Page 3 of 42

12g, or 23 g of plant food. I can only get 10g, or 20g, or 30g, whole multiples of the basic 10g packet. This is an example of a quantum of plant food. Likewise, steel ball bearings, used in many different applications in the modern world, are made in many different sizes. They are typically made of 440C stainless steel (name given to a specific composition of stainless steel.) Several billion ball bearings are made each year [17, 18]. They are all perfectly spherical and the diameter of each steel ball is very accurately controlled, to thousandths of an inch. Hence, each ball bearing has a fixed mass m, which varies very little, just like the 10g packet of plant food. Although I can have any mass m of the ball bearing I desire, depending on the diameter, the total mass M = Nm is a fixed multiple of m. Although m can vary continuously, M will always be some multiple N of the elementary m. Hence, different values of N will be obtained, for the same M, depending on the choice of m (i.e., diameter of the ball bearing). In other words, there is no fixed value of N for the same total M. With this background, the purpose here is to discuss what is meant by the elementary energy quantum , see also Table 1, and if one can indeed determine the number N in the formula E = N = mc2 where we take m as the mass a typical adult in kilograms. Or, look at it this way. How many tiny ball bearings of mass m will be exactly equal your weight M? Can we determine the N in these problems? In Table 1, I have summarized the values of the elementary energy quantum for light of different colors, using the basic equations given by Planck (1900) and Einstein (1905) in the papers they published in the years indicated in the parentheses, which revolutionized physics at the turn of the 20th century; see also Refs. [19-25] for additional details. Heres a sample calculation. The speed of light c = = /T where is the distance (equal to one wavelength) covered by light in the time T (the period of the wave) and frequency = 1/T. The accepted value of c = 299,792, 458 m/s = 2.99792458 x 108 m/s. For wavelength of 700 nanometer (for red light), the frequency = c/ = 299,792,458/ 700 x 10-9 = 428,274.9 x 109 = 428.27 x 1012 Hz = 428.27
Page 4 of 42

THz. Multiplying by the Planck constant h = 6.62606957 x 10-34 J.s gives the energy quanta values (in units of Joules). The last column gives the energy in eV, which is the work done (or energy needed) to move a single electron in an electric field across a potential of one volt. Table 1: The elementary energy quantum for light of different colors Color Wavelength (nm) Frequency f (or ) THz Energy Energy quantum = h quantum (in Joule) = h (in eV)

Violet

380 788.93 5.22749E-19 3.26 390 768.70 5.09345E-19 3.18 Blue 450 666.21 4.41432E-19 2.76 Green 495 605.64 4.01302E-19 2.50 Yellow 570 525.95 3.48499E-19 2.18 Orange 590 508.12 3.36686E-19 2.10 Red 620 483.54 3.20394E-19 2.00 700 428.27 2.83778E-19 1.77 750 399.72 2.64859E-19 1.65 Infrared 1234 242.94 1.60976E-19 1.00 Red 650 461.22 3.05607E-19 1.91 Yellow 580 516.88 3.42491E-19 2.14 Green 540 555.17 3.6786E-19 2.30 Blue 470 637.86 4.22648E-19 2.64 Violet 440 681.35 4.51465E-19 2.82 Notes: The typical human eye is sensitive to range of wavelengths 390-700 nanometer, nm, which is one billionth of a meter. The calculations here cover the range of wavelengths for different light colors given in the sources cited [13-16]. The Wikipedia article [13] also gives the energy calculations for different colors, in units of eV (electron volt) and kJ mol-1. The SI energy unit of Joules is used here. One electron volt = 1.602175656 x 10-19 Joule.

As we see here, there is no single value for the energy quantum for light. It all depends on the color of light (like the mass of a ball bearing which depends on our choice of its diameter or the smallest size of the plant food packet). Even for the same color of light, say blue, there is a range of values for the energy quantum = h = hf. Blue light has the frequency range 606-668 THz, or the wavelength range 450-495 nm, see summary in Table 2. Blue light has an energy quantum. Red light also has an energy quantum. As we see from the photoelectricity experiments, the effects of blue light and red
Page 5 of 42

light on sodium metal are very different. Does red light have a smaller energy quantum? If so, has the energy quantum that blue light has got divided up into something smaller that we see in red light? What makes the energy quantum indivisible? Is there is a truly indivisible energy quantum, like the quantum of electrical charge observed in the oil drop experiments? Everyone seems to agree, when pushed into a discussion, that the energy quantum is indivisible only if the frequency is fixed. But the frequency itself is infinitely divisible! Herein lies a contradiction, IHOPA (in the humble opinion of the present author). We must come to grips with this characteristic of the energy quantum to understand the money quantum observed when we discuss the problem of wealth generation by the richest of billionaires.

Table 2: Frequency and the color of light

Color of light/Name of radiation Frequency f or
Red (620-750 nm) 400-484 THz Orange (590-620 nm) 484-508 THz Yellow (570-590 nm) 508-526 THz Green (495-570 nm) 526-606 THz Blue (450-495nm) 606-668 THz Violet (380-450 nm) 668-789 THz Data sources: For frequencies. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visible_spectrum and http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/609.ral5q.fall04/LecturePDF/L20-LIGHTII.pdf Planck constant from NIST fundamental constants, 6.62606957 x 10-34 Js. http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Category?view=html&Universal.x=90&Universal.y=13 The typical human eye is sensitive wavelengths in the range 390-700 nm (430-790 THz).

Wavelength and Frequencies used by Millikan

Wavelength (Angstroms) 5461 4339 4047 3650 3125 2535 Wavelength (nm) 546.1 433.9 404.7 365.0 312.5 253.5 Frequency (THz) 548.97 690.93 740.78 821.35 959.34 1182.61 Frequency (1013 Hz) 54.90 69.09 74.08 82.13 95.93 118.26

Millikan gives the wavelength in Angstroms and the frequencies in units of 1013 per second (Hz); see references to the original papers at the end of this article.
Page 6 of 42

WHAT FOLLOWS HERE: OPTIONAL, ONLY FOR THE ENQUIRING MINDS Everything that follows here, after Tables 1 and 2, is purely for intellectual curiosity. I have shared here a simple way of deriving: 1. Plancks expression for the average energy U of N particles, in terms of the elementary energy quantum, which is U = /(e/kT 1). 2. Einsteins special relativity equations, especially his equation for the time difference shown by clocks held by observers who are moving relative to each other, which can be written as (t t) = t [(1/) 1]; see text for details. Finally, I have called attention to the fact that we have, IMHO, not yet built the clock that Einstein wants us to use to test his theory critically. These points might seem to be only peripherally related to the energy quantum of interest to us but are still important in the bigger context, since the frequency of light, and , as determined by observers moving relative to each other, is also the subject of the first 1905 paper on the theory of relativity. Einstein [12] gives the following expression for the frequency of light as measured by the observers in relative motion, at the fixed speed U = v where U is the relative velocity, U = v is the rest frame. The quantity outside the LHS of the equation (highlighted in yellow) is the ratio of frequencies and RHS has v/c, is the ratio of velocity v to the speed of light c. / = { [ 1 (v/c)] /[ 1 + v/c)] }1/2 [ 1 (v/c) ]

Page 7 of 42

WHY THE THEORY OF LIGHT QUANTA AND THE DEPENDENCE ON LIGHT FREQUENCY IS SO FASCINATING
The change in the frequency of a wave for an observer, moving relative to its source, is called the Doppler Effect (see Wikipedia article, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_effect). As applied to light, it leads to either a blueshift or a redshift which enables us to determine the velocity with which distant stars or galaxies are either approaching or receding from the observer. Einstein [12] derives the following relativistic expression for the frequency ratio / = [1 (v/c)/[1 + (v/c)] [ 1 (v/c)]2 = 1 (v/c).

Red light in

No Electrons

Blue light in

Electrons out

Sodium Metal
Imagine observers in relative motion performing the experiment with sodium. If two observers are moving relative to each other, the frequency of the light changes as given above. Since v/c < 1, the ratio / < 1. Hence, a high frequency for observer A will be perceived as a low frequency for observer B who is moving relative to observer A. Will the moving observing see the light as red instead of blue? If so, will one observer see electrons being emitted while the other does not? The Wikipedia animation is also recommended in this context, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_Doppler_effect This too is an interesting consequence of the theory of relativity and we cannot view Einsteins 1905 paper on light quanta as being completely divorced and independent of his theory of relativity. The reader is also referred to the discussion by Weinstein [26]. Surprisingly, Weinstein does not mention what has just been noted the implications with respect to photoelectric effect because of the change in the frequency of light.
Page 8 of 42

Plancks elementary energy quantum and its application by Einstein to light

In a famous, presented at the meeting of the German Physical Society on December 14, 1900 paper [27-31], Max Planck puts forward the idea that the total energy UN of N particles can be written as UN = NU = P where N and P are very large integers, U is the average energy and is an elementary measure for energy, or what we now call the quantum of energy. Thus, the ratio P/N= U/ = ..(1)

Planck then derives the relation between U and . The product NU is the familiar way of thinking about the total energy of N particles. The same product can also be written as P; see also Kragh [16]. This is the key step taken by Planck and led to the birth of modern quantum physics. If there are N = 10 particles, with energy of 100 units, there are many different ways of distributing this total energy among the N particles. Planck provides the following example in his December 1900 paper. For an English translation of Plancks original paper, see Shamos [27]. It can also be found online [29]. Table 3: Plancks Example of Energy Distribution from his 1900 paper Particle no. N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Energy of particle 7 38 11 0 9 2 20 4 4 5 The number of particles N = 10 and total energy UN = NU = 100 = P. There are many different microstates that will give rise to the same macrostate UN = NU. There are obviously many different ways of distributing the 100 units of energy among the 10 particles. This gives rise to a property called entropy S. Planck then gives the expression for entropy that is obtained from the elementary theory of permutations and combination and includes factorials of N and P and R is the number of ways. Entropy SN = S0 + k ln R = k ln [ (N + P 1)! /(N 1)! P! ] R = (N + P 1)! /(N 1)! P! ..(2) ..(3)

Page 9 of 42

A logarithmic relation between S and R is envisioned, with ln denoting the natural logarithm of R. The proportionality constant k relating S and R is called the Boltzmann constant. Plank includes the nonzero additive constant S0 and also discusses this in his Nobel lecture we can only measure the differences in the entropy or the energy, not the absolute values. The expression for R is that given by Boltzmann in a famous 1877 paper [27-29, 32]; see also the remarks made by Planck, almost 20 years later, in his Nobel lecture [28], about his struggles with accepting equation 2 and the implications of the quantity R from the elementary theory of permutations and combinations. In his recent review, 100 years later, Kragh [16] notes that Planck interpreted equations 2 and 3 in a non-probabilistic way. Thus, S is a function of the ratio P/N or U/. It is of interest to note that the formula for R used by Planck is the same as the formula used to determine the number of ways in which one can have 3 scoops of five favorite flavors of ice cream; see Math is Fun [33]. After using Stirlings approximation for factorials, x! xx, Planck arrives at the following expression for the average entropy S = SN/N which only depends on which is the ratio P/N (see equation 1). S = k [ (1 + ) ln (1 + ) ln ] ..(4)

Performing differentiation, using the elementary rule d(lnx) = dx/x, leads to dS = k { (1 + ) d [ln(1 + )] + ln(1 + )d d(ln) ln d } dS/d = (dS/dU) = k ln [ 1 + (1/) ] = k ln [ 1 + (/U)] Now, Planck introduces T = dU/dS or 1/T= dS/dU to arrive at the expression for U given below, in terms of . Hence, the above becomes, = kT { ln [(U + )/U ]} or /kT = ln [1 + (/U)] giving the following U =/(e/kT 1) = [e-/kT /(1 e-/kT) ] = [e-ax /(1 e-ax) ] ..(5)

The reader can thus readily derive equation 5 which is the most general expression for the average energy U for a complex system, in terms of the elementary . It only involves kT and . It should be noted that other than equations 1 and 2 and the relation 1/T = dS/dU, Planck has revealed nothing
Page 10 of 42

about the nature of the elementary to arrive at the remarkable expression for U. The constant k appearing in equation 5 was introduced into the theory via the expression for the entropy of the system of N particles. The parameter T is the rate of change of the average energy U with respect to entropy S and is called the temperature of the system. Its reciprocal 1/T is the rate of change of entropy S with respect to the energy U. What is ? It is only at this stage that Planck introduces his famous = h where the constant h is the Planck constant and is the frequency. The expression for U can also written as the last equality where a = h/kT and x is the frequency. More generally, we can think of equation 5 as the most general expression for the average value U of any property of interest to us (not just energy) when we are dealing with a complex system, capable of exhibiting many different microstates. Each state of the system, such as given in Table 3, is called a complexion and the number of complexions R is a very large number, giving rise to the entropy of the system. The myriads of microscopic entities N that make up a complexion are associated with some property of interest, for which we can continue to use the symbols U and UN. The property called entropy is a consequence of the many possible complexions. The property called T, the temperature of the system (or 1/T its reciprocal) is simply the rate of change of U with respect to S, or T = dU/dS and 1/T = dS/dU and k is a constant appearing in the entropy relation. This rather broad generalization of the Planck-Einstein ideas can give rise to a new worldview, especially as applied to business, financial, and economic systems, and also social, political, and environmental systems, and to the observations made in a number of cultural situations and in the sports world; see bibliography list given at the end of this article [49-59]. Finally, the recent discussion by Professor Kragh [16], historian of science and technology, is highly recommended. The central role played by entropy in Plancks thinking is highlighted here as is the meaning of the integer P; see
Page 11 of 42

remarks on page 33, the paragraph to the right of the intensity-wavelength graph; see image extracted below. The total energy of the blackbody oscillators E = UN = P = P(h). Note the qualifying phrase once multiplied by the common frequency of the resonators is specified. This like diameter of ball bearings that must be specified to compute N in the equation M = Nm.

From http://www.math.lsa.umich.edu/~ krasny/math156_article_planck.pdf

Max Planck: The Reluctant Revolutionary By Helge Kragh Physics World December 2000 See also discussion of Boltzmanns 1877 paper at http://www.scribd.com/doc/ 95728457/What-is-Entropy See also Boses paper [75].

Page 12 of 42

THE TOTAL NUMBER OF ENERGY QUANTA AND BOSES DERIVATION OF PLANCKS LAW
It is of interest to note here the key steps taken by Bose [75, 76], in his 1924 paper, to derive Plancks law; see also the discussion of Bose-Einstein statistics by Delbrck [77]. Bose derives Planck's radiation law (published in 1900 and then in 1901) using a new statistical argument. Bose begins by first pointing out the flaws in the prior derviations of Plancks law. The law can be written as the product of two quantities A and B. Energy density = (density of states)(average energy of each particle) = AB = (82/c3)U = The average of each particle is the quantity U that was derived by Planck, as just discussed. The term density of states means the number of particles per unit volume. Thus, the energy density (also called spectral energy density since it refers to a specific frequency) is the energy per unit volume. Bose points out that Planck only derived the quantity B, viz., the expression for U. The quantity A = (82/c3) has been deduced using classical physics. In classical physics, U = kT and the law is then called the Rayleigh-Jeans law with A being derived using classical arguments. This presents a logical inconsistency. Then Bose shows that the entire product AB can derived using new statistical arguments. This was obviously appreciated by Einstein, who arranged to have Boses paper published in Zeitschrift fr Physik [76, 77]. Very briefly, Bose starts by imagining with a volume V which is filled with radiation with a total energy E. (The energy density is thus E/V.) Let there be quanta of different species, he says, with abundance Ns each with the energy hs (with s going from 0 to ). The total energy E is sum of the energies of all the quantas. Thus, E = Ns (hs) Here h is the Planck constant and s the frequency where subscript s means that the frequency goes from 0 to . Bose then defines the momentum of
Page 13 of 42

each quanta as ps = hs/c. This gives rise to a theoretical six-dimensional space characterized by the coordinates x, y, z and the components of the momentum px , py, pz in the three coordinate directions; see also the discussion by Delbrck [77]. He then shows that we can divide the total phase volume** into cells of size h3 and imagines a distribution of the energy quanta in these phase cells such that there are p0s cells with energy 0, p1s with energy quantum of 1, p2s with 2 energy quanta, and so on. Thus, Ns = 0.p0s + 1.p1s + 2.p2s + . He then uses the formula for permutations with repetitions [77, 78] to determine the number of distributions (W) and arrives at the entire Planck law subject to the constraints of total energy E and total number of quanta which will maximize the probability of states W = As! /p0s!p1s!p2s! . Note that the total phase volume As = (82/c3)V d. Maximizing W subject to the constraints (using the method of Lagrangian multipliers from our calculus courses) then yields the full Planck radiation formula. The first factor has thus automatically been derived using a new expression for W (which replaces Plancks R). Some references which discuss the elementary formulae for permutations and combinations are included for convenience [78-81] to gain further insights into the two different methods of calculating the entropy using S = k lnW, by Bose, and S = k ln R, by Planck.

______________________________________________________ ** The surface area of a sphere equals 4R2 and hence the volume of spherical shell of thickness dR will be dV = 4R2dR. The volume of the sphere V = (4/3)R3 is obtained by integration. Likewise, as noted by Delbrck, Bose obtains the number of quantum cells by considering the momentum space, with the infinitesimal volume dV = 4R2dR with R = (h/c) and spherical shell thickness dR = (hd/c). Thus, dV = (42/c2)h3 d.

Page 14 of 42

Delbrck [77], who received the Nobel Prize in Medicine, in 1969, has pointed out an interesting flaw in the method of counting used by Bose. We must think of the quanta like three people, Tom, Dick, and Harry, who occupy two rooms, as illustrated below. Instead, Delbrck points out that Bose is envisioning the situation differently and defines a microstate by counting how many quanta are in each state; like counting how many (identical) men in each room. The men are NOT identical and the quanta also are NOT all identical since the frequencies are different. The elementary energy elements are equal to hs where the subscript s goes from 0 to .

Tom and Dick in living room Harry in kitchen

Bose seems to thinking about the quanta in this way, according to Delbrck, like identical men. , lik

Harry, Dick, and Tom, alone in kitchen and the other two in the living room.

Page 15 of 42

APPENDIX I: Newton and the Colors of the Rainbow

It was Newton who showed that white light made up the (seven) different colors of the rainbow (VIBGYOR) by separating the component colors using a prism [19-25]. Here V is violet, I indigo (now dropped from this list), B is blue, G is green, Y is yellow, O is orange and R is red. Newton also believed that light is made up of particles that obey his laws of mechanics.

Figure 1: The Color wheel depicting the primary and secondary colors. Courtesy: http://www.jessicacrabtree.com/journal1/2009/09/hints-of-color-2 However, his contemporaries, notably Robert Hooke and Christian Huygens held the view that light was a wave. Huygens, in particular, was very successful in applying his wave theory to explain the laws of reflection and refraction, as discussed in most physics texts and other treatises on the subject [23-25]. Hooke, with whom Newton had an antagonist relation for most his life, was vehemently opposed to Newtons particle view, so much so that it is widely noted that Newton published his work on Opticks, in 1707, only after Hookes death. Unlike the Principia, which was published in 1687 and written in Latin, the Optiks was written in English and became very popular and Newton published three revisions of this book. Each color of the rainbow, according to Newton, was due to light particles having a different momentum p = mv = mc where m is the mass of the light particle and v is the velocity. Newtons view led to the prediction that the
Page 16 of 42

speed of light in water would be higher than its speed in air. This particle view of light was summarily discredited when Foucaults experiments (in 1850) should that the speed of light in water is less than in air, the exact opposite of Newtons predictions. The wave theory of light, on the other hand, predicted a lower speed, in agreement with experiments. (A list of new references is provided at the end of the article to avoid revising the reference numbers in the original first publication.) Foucaults experimental result, together with Thomas Youngs famous two slit experiment (in 1801) demonstrating the interference (of light waves) marked the end of Newtons particle view of light. The wave theory reached its pinnacle of success when Maxwell showed that light must be a wave of electromagnetic origin, with a speed c = (ab)-1/2 where a and b are the constants in the expressions for the electrical and magnetic force (called the permittivity 0 and permeability 0, respectively). Or, stated differently, c2 = 1/ab = 1/(00). Hence, for any fixed speed c, the graph of 0 versus 0 is a rectangular hyperbola with the observed values (0, 0) being just one single point on this hyperbola [34]. It is against this context that we must judge Einsteins paper on light quanta [35-39] and his explanation of the cut-off frequency observed in Lenards experiments [40, 41]. Einstein was boldly reviving Newtons old and discredited idea but gave it a new twist. Instead of associating a momentum with each light particle, like Newton did, Einstein associated a fixed amount of energy with each particle (depending on the frequency, = h, or E = hf). Einsteins 1905 paper on light quanta was therefore more revolutionary than his papers on relativity, as discussed recently by Weinstein [26]. This new particle view of light was put to a successful test by Millikan [1] in his photoelectricity experiments [2, 3]; see also the recent discussions [42-47] to commemorate the centennial of Einsteins 1905 publications. Thus, the lower case c is now commonly used to denote the speed of light, as in Einsteins famous equation E = mc2, where E is the energy and m is the mass. The speed of light is an unimaginably huge number (about 186,000 miles per second, or 299,792,458 m/s, or 2.998 x 108 m/s) and a small change
Page 17 of 42

in mass m will result in a huge change in the energy E = c2m. In his original 1905 paper, Einstein mentions that his mass-energy equivalence can be tested with radioactive bodies (such as radium salts) whose energy content varies to a high degree. The theory was eventually confirmed experimentally, by Otto Hahn and Strassman, who decided to repeat Fermis experiments to understand the chemical nature of the transuranic elements produced in the latters experiments; see the fascinating account given by Hahn in his Nobel lecture [48]. When the uranium atom is bombarded by slow moving (or thermal) neutrons, it does not produce transuranic elements (with atomic numbers greater than 92, the atomic number of uranium) as had been claimed by Fermi. Rather the uranium atom breaks up into two smaller atoms (barium and krypton) resulting in a small loss in the mass and its conversion into a huge amount of energy.

https://www.google.com/search?q=frequency+of+light+colors&tbm=isch&imgil=L_O5O2yUF9js hM%253A%253Bhttps%253A%252F%252Fencryptedbn1.gstatic.com%252Fimages%253Fq%253Dtbn%253AANd9GcSiM2kHWRaQA439wIgz6mcwRN 2u7WNFzewe2U81eWGAZU_gmd80%253B499%253B271%253B2LUCPaqVXSNtM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fstackoverflow.com%25252Fquestions% 25252F12239986%25252Fconvert-rgb-to-light-frequency&source=iu&usg=__DhFdyVoOdpPZKFwpPOv1oQYhZg%3D&sa=X&ei=ecwlU763LcOR0AGD5oDICQ&sqi=2&ved=0CEQQ9QEw BA&biw=1335&bih=606

Page 18 of 42

In the 1905 special relativity paper [12], Einstein also derives the expression relating the frequency and for light as measured by two observers moving relative to each other. This leads to the conclusion that the ratio / depends only the ratio v/c where c is the speed of light and v is the relative velocity of the two observers; see discussion by Weinstein [26]. Finally, heres a nice explanation of light quanta and the observations on the photoelectric effect taken from Ref. [43].
The intensity of the light does not affect the energy of the electrons, but the number of ejected electrons. From Scientific American. All these experimental observations are explained by Einstein's photon idea. The low energy red light hits the metal as low energy photons. These photons "bump" low energy electrons off of the metal. If the intensity of the light increases, then more low energy photons hit the plate and more low energy photons are ejected. By shining the high energy blue light on the plate, high energy photons hit the plate and more energetic electrons are knocked off.

The extension of the Planck-Einstein ideas to problems outside physics (from economics, finance, business, sports, etc.) has been discussed in several recent articles by the authors [49-59]. Of interest is the appearance of what seems like a quantum for the increase in the net worth of billionaires such as Mark Zuckerberg [52]. This will be tested more critically in the days, weeks, and months ahead with the daily net worth data from Bloomberg Billionaires Index. Some notes are attached to the individual references and some brief comments follow them.
Page 19 of 42

APPENDIX II: Some Notes on Special Relativity

ELECTRON VOLT AND THE WORK DONE ON AN ELECTRON The electron volt is the work done to move the elementary charge q (one electron) through a potential difference of one volt. The work done, or energy E = qV, equals the charge times the potential difference. In his first 1905 paper on special relativity [12], Einstein determines the work done (W), against the relativistic forces, to move an electron from infinity into an electric field. The final result is: W = mc2( -1) where =[1 (v2/c2)]-1/2 Here m is the mass of the electron, as defined by Einstein in the 1905 paper, and v is the velocity of the electron, which is being viewed in a reference frame moving with the electron, at the speed of the electron. This is the rest frame, as discussed in the previous section of the 1905 paper on special relativity; see pages 61 to 64 of Ref. [12]. The same m also appears in Einsteins expressions for the forces acting on the electron in the x, y, and z directions (page 62). Einstein says we must be careful when we compare different theories and briefly discusses the Lorentz idea of a longitudinal mass (force equation for x-direction, the direction of motion) and the transverse mass (force equation for the transverse direction) of the electron. Later the same equation (for W) was reinterpreted by others as implying a velocity dependence for the mass given by m = m0( 1) where Einsteins original m became the rest mass m0 and the velocity-dependent factor got associated with Einsteins m. Strictly speaking, according to the principle of relativity, the charge q and mass m are fundamental quantities that are not affected by the velocity of the observer. Einstein states this quite clearly on page 54 when he discusses the meaning of charge according to this theory. Also, in section dealing with the motion of the electron (10, pages 61 to 63 of Ref. [12]), we find Einstein clearly disagreeing with Lorentzs viewpoint of mass of electron varying in different directions. He notes that force = mass times acceleration (see page 63, Ref. [12]) and then gives the expressions for

Page 20 of 42

the longitudinal and transverse masses, as deduced by Lorentz in a paper published in 1904, see equation 30 of Ref. [60]. Note that Lorentz was already a Nobel laureate and received the Nobel Prize in physics, in 1902. We see Lorentz talking about the newly discovered electron in his Nobel lecture and the strange property that it seems to have, with a velocity dependent mass [61], a view that Einstein says is INCONSISTENT with this theory of relativity. The velocity dependent factors, in the expressions for the force on the electron in the x, y, and z, directions, according to Einstein, show changes in the acceleration, not changes in the mass of the electron, or any other moving body. Nonetheless (and unfortunately, IMHO), 20th century physicists came to adopt the view of a velocity-dependent mass and have associated the velocity dependent factor with m and converted Einsteins origin m into the rest mass m0. The present author likes to agree with the original Einstein viewpoint. Why must we disagree with one of the fundamental postulates of relativity, as emphasized by Einstein, and insist on a velocity dependence for the mass? VELOCITY-DEPENDENCE FOR THE ELECTRON MASS: LORENTZS NOBEL LECTURE The following (in the smaller fonts) is a verbatim quote from Lorentzs Nobel lecture, delivered in 1902.
The electron theory also presents an enormous field of study outside the realm of magnetooptical phenomena. For one thing, the free-moving electrons, with which we are concerned in cathode rays and in some types of Becquerel rays, give rise to many interesting problems. I will single out only the important question of the so-called apparent mass of these particles. A definite magnetic field in the surrounding ether - and hence also a certain amount of energy in this medium - are inextricably connected with every movement of an electron; we can therefore never set an electron in motion without simultaneously imparting energy to the ether. To do this a great amount of work is necessary, and we must employ a greater force than if it were not necessary to set up this magnetic field. Calculation shows that the force required is the same as would be needed if the mass were somewhat greater than it is in reality. In other words, if we determine the mass in the usual way from the phenomena, we get the true mass increased by an amount which we can call the apparent, or electromagnetic, mass. The two together form the effective mass which determines the phenomena.

Page 21 of 42

Now the investigations published by Kaufmann and Abraham in the past year have shown that the apparent mass is by no means to be discounted. It certainly forms a considerable part of the effective mass, and there is a possibility that in the end we shall have to ascribe apparent mass only and never true mass at all to electrons. The peculiar thing about this apparent mass is, moreover, that it is not constant, but depends on the velocity; consequently the study of the motion of the electron differs in many ways from ordinary dynamics.

While Lorentz mentions the work of Kaufmann and Abraham, quite surprisingly, he fails to mention the work of J. J. Thomson, widely considered to mark the discovery of the electron. Sir J. J. Thomson received the Nobel Prize in 1906 for his discovery. (Kaufmann uses beta rays, or electrons, produced by a radioactive source to measure the mass/charge ratio. The velocity of these electrons is, therefore, very close to the speed of light and much higher than those observed in Thomsons experiments. However, Kaufmann uses a more complicated experimental technique than was used by J. J. Thomson, making them more difficult to interpret.) In a well-known paper [60], published in 1904, after this Nobel lecture was delivered, and a year before Einstein published his special relativity paper in 1905, Lorentz develops his mathematical theory for the motion of an electron, in a reference frame moving with a velocity v along the x-axis. In this reference frame, the velocity of the electron, with the components u x , uy , uz along the (x, y, z) co-ordinate axes, becomes, vx = v + ux and vy = uy and vz = uz ..(L1)

These equations can be found on page 13 of Ref. [60]. Then, after listing Maxwells equations (for the electric and magnetic fields), Lorentz proposes a transformation of co-ordinates as follows x = x, y = y, z = z ..(L2) ..(L3) ..(L4)

t = (/)t - (vx/c2) = ()t [ (1/2) - (vx/c2t) ] where, = [1 (v2/c2)]-1/2

Page 22 of 42

Lorentz states that the parameter introduced in this transformation of coordinates is to be determined later on in the analysis. It is assumed to have a value of = 1 when the relative velocity v = 0. The variable t is called the local time. These remarks can be found on pages 14 and 15 of Ref. [60]. When v = 0, = 1 and t = t if = 1. The velocity dependent factor , with the ratio v/c, where v is the relative velocity of the two reference frame and c the speed of light, is exactly the same factor that appears also in Einsteins space and time relations for x and t. I have written the expression for t in a manner that is as close as possible to the expression for relativistic time given by Einstein in his 1905 paper, which can be written as follows. t = t + x = [t (vx/c2) ] = t [ 1 (vx/c2t) ] ..(L4)

Comparing equations (L3) and (L4) we see that even with = 1, there is still a BIG difference between the Einstein and Lorentz expressions. The difference arises from the fact that Lorentz does not assume the speed of light to be a universal constant having the same value for all observers. It is also of interest to consider the ratio x/t for Lorentz. The ratio x/t = (x/t) /[(1/2) - (vx/c2t)] = x / [(t/2) - (vx/c2)] ..(L5)

For the special case of v = 0, = 1 and we get x/t = x/t. For a nonzero relative velocity v the ratio x/t differs from the ratio x/t which is due to the differences in the speed of light for observers moving relative to each other. Lorentz appears to have been among the first of Einsteins peers to appreciate the elegance of the mathematical results of the 1905 special relativity paper and the notion that the times t and t are different with c = c for both reference frames.

Page 23 of 42

ON THE MEANING OF AN INERTIAL REFERENCE FRAME Angels travel at the speed of light, as noted in Ref. [71], which refers to a passage from the Muslim scripture the Holy Koran. This speed is deduced from the distance traveled by the angels (12000 lunar orbits) in one earth day. To prove this proposition, the author discusses the difference between an inertial [72] and a non-inertial reference frame. Hence, the following brief discussion is added here. Bergmanns treatment is highly recommended [73]. Bergmann was a close associate of Einstein at Princeton University and Einstein has written a nice foreword to Bergamnns book on relativity. According to Newtons first law of motion, every object continues in a state of rest, or uniform motion along a straight line, unless it is compelled to do otherwise due to the action of an external force. Or, to quote verbatim from Andrew Mottes translation of the Principia (see page 19, readily available at any bookstore [74]), Law I, Every body preserves in its state of rest, or uniform motion in a right line, unless it is compelled to change that state by forces impressed thereon. In other words, there is no acceleration in the absence of a force and the velocity of the object v = constant where the constant can also have the value of zero which means the object is at rest. If nonzero, the object is in motion and will be found to move in a straight line, if no forces act on it. In the presence of a force, the situation changes and objects are subject to acceleration, regardless of whether the path is a straight line or a curve. If a curve, such as a circle, there is an acceleration, even if the velocity itself is constant. (For an object moving in a circular path, it can be shown that acceleration a = v2/R where v is the constant velocity and R is the radius of the path traced. Such a perfect circle is traced by an electrical charge if acted upon by PURELY by magnetic forces.) Thus, in his first paper on the theory of relativity, which is called special relativity, published in 1905, Einstein reconsiders the notions of space and
Page 24 of 42

time, after introducing his postulate of the universal constancy of the speed of light. Instead of a single observer, Einstein considers two observers who are moving relative to each other at a fixed speed U along the x-axis. Let (x, y, z, t) denote the familiar space and time coordinates for observer A and let (x, y, z, t) denote the space and time coordinates for observer B, who is moving relative to observe A, at the fixed speed U, along the x-direction. Thus, the reference frames considered by Einstein in this first paper on relativity are called inertial reference frames or Galilean frames. No acceleration is detected by either observer; see also Bergmann [73], page 33. It is assumed that the two co-ordinate frames are exactly coincident at the time t = t = 0. In other words x = x =0 at t = t = 0 and the two observers start moving. They observe a light front which is imagined to spread from the origin at the time t = t = 0. What will be the relation between the co=ordinates x and x and t and t if the speed of light c, as measured by both observers is the same? This is one of the postulates of the theory of relativity. Thus, r = ct for observer A and r = ct for observer B, where r = (x2 + y2 + z2)1/2 is the radius of the spherical light front for observer A and r = (x 2 + y 2 + z 2)1/2 is the radius of the same front as determined by observer B. We do not question the postulate itself but examine its consequences and test its predictions. Since speed equals distance divided by time, it follows that r/t = c for observe A and r/t = c for observer B. If observers A and B measure the same light speed, i.e., if c = r/t = c = r/t, it follows that t and t cannot be identical and space, and also time itself, must be relative. To conform to this new view of the universal constancy of the speed of light, the relation between the space and time co-ordinates is re-derived. Einstein starts with the simplest of possible mathematical relations, given below as equations 6 and 7, see also Bergmann [73]. x = (x Ut) t = t + x ..(6) ..(7)

Page 25 of 42

Note that both the space and time coordinates (x and t) have been thoroughly mixed up by equation 7 for t. In the pre-relativity physics before Einstein, it was assumed that time is an absolute quantity have the same value for all observers. In other words, t = t which means = 0 and = 1. Also, relativity of space was recognized even in pre-Einstein physics. The parameter = 1 in pre-relativity physics. This is the reason why the speed of a car, moving alongside another vehicle, appears to be lower than if the car is observed by a stationary observer on the road side. If the two observers A and B can match their speeds, the two vehicles will appear to be stationary. Einstein derives the relations between x and x and t and t which revolutionized physics and led to the notions of length contraction and time dilation which are discussed on pages 48 to 50 of Ref. [12]. Bergmanns step by step treatment can be understood even by advanced high school students. Essentially we write the equations for the spherical fronts seen by the observer A, r2 = x2 + y2 + z2 = c2t2, and observer B, r2 = x 2 + y 2 + z2 = c2t2 with c = c, and compare the coefficients of each term. This yields the three constants, , , and in special relativity. = = [1 (U2/c2)]-1/2 = -(U/c2)= - (U/c2) ..(8) ..(9)

and

Equations 8 and 9, as well as 10 and 11 below, can be found on the top of page 48 of Ref. [12], Einsteins first paper on the theory of (special) relativity. Thus, and, x = (x Ut) t = [t (Ux/c2)] ........(10) ..(11)

Note that t depends on U and x, as expected, because of the linear relation already assumed via equation 7. Now, Einstein introduces an interesting concept, which is used throughout the special relativity paper. He wants us to consider the special case of U = v where v = x/t is the velocity of a moving
Page 26 of 42

object of interest to us, such as a moving electron, observed in J. J. Thomsons cathode ray experiments. The special reference frame U = v means that we are observing the electron, in a reference frame moving with the electron, at exactly the speed of the electron, see page 61 of Ref. [12] where Einstein discusses the motion of the electron, and the forces acting on the electron according to this new theory. Sir J. J. Thomson is observing the electron in his laboratory and another observer, lets say Einstein, is chasing the electron and observes it in the special reference frame U = v. (Biographers have talked about Einstein imagining, even as a young boy, what would happen if one could chase a beam of light.) The special reference frame U = v is called the rest frame in relativity (the object appears to be at rest, like the two cars on the highway, moving along parallel paths with the same speed). In this special reference frame, after setting U = v = x/t, we get, t = t [1 (Ux/tc2)] = t [1 (Uv/c2)]1/2 = t[ 1 (v2/c2)] ..(12)

Note the several steps that have been intentionally included to arrive at the expression relating t and t. Now, we introduce the expression for with U = v and compute the time difference shown by the two clocks. First, we note that equation 12 simplifies to the following, t = t/ or t = t or t/t = 1/ Hence, the time difference (t t) = t [ (1/) 1] ..(13) ..(14)

Next, using the approximation 1/ = [1 (v2/c2)]1/2 1 (v2/c2) gives the final time difference equation found on page 49 of Ref. [12]. (t t) (v2/c2) t ..(15)

After deriving this time difference equation, Einstein describes a simple experiment which can be performed to test the relativity of time, as predicted
Page 27 of 42

here. Place one clock on the equator and one on one of the poles of the earth. Today, it is indeed possible to place a clock on the South Pole of the earth, where we already have permanent stations where various scientific experiments are being conducted.

Mirror 1

Mirror 2

Schematic illustration of the Einstein clock with a light ray (shown with the tipped arrows) bouncing back and forth between (perfectly parallel) mirrors. The clock ticks when the light ray makes the back and forth journey. The ticking rate t = 2D/c where D is the distance between the two mirrors and c is the know speed of light. Einstein suggests that we build such a clock BEFORE beginning any of his mathematical deliberations on the space and time relations, and the motion of the electron.

The clock on the equator is moving with the tangential (rotational) speed of the earth relative to the clock at the Poles, which is stationary. A measurable time difference shown by these two clocks (even if we do not find PERFECT numerical agreement) will be the most critical and eloquent test of the theory of relativity. None of the other tests, in the opinion of the present author, such as the tests of the velocity dependence of the electron mass, the half-life of mu-mesons, or the test with aircrafts going around the world, are fully satisfactory. The fuller discussion for the reasons is beyond the scope of the present article (already well beyond its original scope of discussing the energy quantum in physics). However, the clocks used for such a test should NOT rely in any way upon the force of gravity. For example, Einstein states quite clearly that we cannot use pendulum clocks (see footnote on page 50, Ref. [12]). Even modern atomic clocks use the force of gravity (see Ref. [34]) in that balls of atoms
Page 28 of 42

are allowed to fall through the gravity field of the earth. The clock that Einstein recommends, one that ticks when a light ray is allowed to bounce back and forth between two mirrors, at a distance D, has NOT yet been built. Einstein describes such a clock in 1 of his 1905 paper on special relativity, BEFORE even begins any of his mathematical deliberations about space and time. The clock will tick at the rate t = 2D/c where D is the distance between the mirrors and c is the known speed of light. Two such identical clocks are carried by the observers A and B who are in relative motion at the fixed speed U, which is taken as U = v, when making observations on moving objects of interest to us. It is such a test that will ultimately provide the real PROOF needed to demonstrate the relativity of time, in Einsteins view. Such a test, IMHO, or (IHOPA), in the opinion of the present author, has still to be performed, precisely because the Einstein clock with light ray bouncing back and forth has still NOT been built. Of course, the author may be in error and would like to know from other eminent physicists about the existence of such an Einsteinian clock. Finally, can we use a clock that already assumes the correctness of the theory of relativity and incorporates the theory in some way to measure time itself?

Acknowledgements
I am thankful for the lovely color images that I have used here quite freely, mainly to enhance the value of this contribution to the reader. All these sources are gratefully acknowledged and references have been cited with links to the original publications.

Page 29 of 42

REFERENCES [1] [2] Millikan, R. A., The electron and light quanta from experimental point of
view, Nobel lecture, May 23, 1924,
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1923/millikan-lecture.pdf

[3]

Millikan, R. A., Einsteins Photoelectric Equation and Contact Electromotive Force, Phys. Rev. 7, 18-32, (1916). This is the first of two papers on photoelectricity published in 1916; see Figure 2 with only two measurements with lithium. http://hermes.ffn.ub.es/luisnavarro/nuevo_maletin/Millikan_1916_1.pdf Millikan, R. A., Direct Photoelectric Determination of Plancks h, Phys. Rev. pp. 355-88 (1916) http://hermes.ffn.ub.es/luisnavarro/nuevo_maletin/Millikan_1916_2.pdf Interestingly, Millikan does not present the sodium and lithium data on a single graph probably because the slopes are slightly different. The following linear regression equations were obtained using his data. For lithium V0 = 0.4126 f 3.593, from 1st paper published in 1916 For lithium V0 = 0.4223 f 3.922, from 2nd paper published in 1916 For sodium V0 = 0.4069 f 4.288, from 2nd paper published in 1916

[4] [5]

[6] [7]

[8]

Whitener, K., How do we know that light is a particle? December 10, 2013, http://www.howdoweknowit.com/tag/millikan/ Shedding Light on Quantum Physics, S & TR, June 2005, Lawrence Livermore Labs, https://www.llnl.gov/str/June05/pdfs/06_05.2.pdf Effect of red and blue light on sodium metal explained with a nice illustration. Millikan, R. A., Phys. Rev. 32, pp. 349-398 (1911); Millikan, R. A., On the Elementary Electric charge and the Avogadro Constant, Phys. Rev. vol. II, No. 2, pp. 109-143 (1913); see https://www.aip.org/history/gap/PDF/millikan.pdf Shamos, M. H., Great Experiments in Physics, The Elementary Electrical Charge, pp. 238-249, Dover Publications (1959); link for online version
http://books.google.com/books?id=J0fCAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA240&lpg=PA240&dq=mi llikan+oil+drop+experiment+1911+paper&source=bl&ots=Owm0_Lc56f&sig=2u1B rt5vHEPe8mMFw8PB2VWpe0M&hl=en&sa=X&ei=lfYmUXHOofh0gH__oHgBQ&ved=0CD0Q6AEwAzgK#v=onepage&q=millikan%20oil%20dr op%20experiment%201911%20paper&f=false
Page 30 of 42

[9] [10] [11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

Goodstein, D., In the Case of Robert Andrew Millikan, American Scientist, Jan-Feb 2001, http://www.its.caltech.edu/~dg/MillikanII.pdf Sciences 10 Most Beautiful Experiments, http://physicsanimations.com/Physics/English/top10.htm Einstein, A., Does the Inertia of a Body Depend on its Energy Content? pp. 69-71, in The Principle of Relativity, Dover Publications (1952). English translations of the original papers on relativity by Einstein and other leading scientists. The statement made by Einstein, The mass of a body is a measure of its energy content can be found in the concluding paragraphs on page 71. Einstein, A., On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies, pp. 37-65, in The Principle of Relativity, Dover Publications (1952). The equation for the energy enclosed within a light front, page 58, derived in this first paper is used in the second paper to derive the mass-energy equivalence [13]. Laxmanan, V., How Einstein Himself Derives the Worlds Most Famous Equation, Published June 18, 2013, http://www.scribd.com/doc/146483302/How-Einstein-HimselfDerives-the-World-Most-Famous-Equation Fundamental Constants, Values for the speed of light and Planck constant can be found here, http://physics.nist.gov/cgibin/cuu/Category?view=html&Universal.x=90&Universal.y=13 Michael Fowler, The speed of light, Michelson measured speed of light, an improvement of Foucaults method, to get 186,355 miles per second, http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virginia.edu/lectures/spedlite.html Kragh, H., Max Planck the reluctant revolutionary, Physics World, December 2000, pp. 31-35,
http://www.math.lsa.umich.edu/~krasny/math156_article_planck.pdf

[17] Ball bearings, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_%28bearing%29 [18] How Products are made: Ball bearings http://www.madehow.com/Volume-1/Ball-Bearing.html

Page 31 of 42

[19] Color http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color Table of colors, wavelength, frequency and energy (in eV and kJ mol-1)

The Planck constant h has units of Joule-second (energy multiplied by time). One electron volt (eV) = 1.602176565 x 10-19 J; see http://www.rapidtables.com/convert/energy/ev-tojoule.htm . The calculations in Table 1 can be shown to agree with the values in eV given here.

[20] The Visible Spectrum, Nice table of colors and wavelength and frequency. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visible_spectrum

Page 32 of 42

[21] Jessica Crabtree, Hints of Color, http://www.jessicacrabtree.com/journal1/2009/09/hints-of-color-2 [22] Newtons Particle theory of Light, http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/609.ral5q.fall04/LecturePDF/L 20-LIGHTII.pdf See discussion of refraction based on Newtons particle view, the decisive test by Foucault which proved Newton to be in error (light travels more slowly in water than in air, opposite of Newtons view), discussion of Thomas Youngs interference experiment (he used Newtons data to deduce wavelengths of red and violet light and got values of 650 nm for red and 440 nm for violet, in agreement with modern measurements, proving that Newton was a very good experimentalist); see also color, wavelength table on last page: Red 650 nm, Yellow 580 nm, Green 540 nm, Blue 470 nm, and Violet 440 nm. [23] Halliday D., Resnick R., Walker, J., Fundamentals of Physics, John Wiley and Sons (2013) [24] Segre, E., From Falling Bodies to Radio Waves: Classical Physicists and their Discoveries, Dover Publications, 2007 Segre received the Nobel Prize in physics for his discovery of the anti-proton. [25] Baierlein, R., From Newton to Einstein, The Trail of Light, (2001) [26] Weinstein, Galina., The 1905 Relativity Paper and the Light Quantum, http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1307/1307.2132.pdf [27] Planck, M. The Quantum Hypothesis, in Great Experiments in Physics, Morris H. Shamos (Ed.), Dover Publications (1959) pp. 301-314; see also
http://books.google.com/books?id=J0fCAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA305&lpg=PA305&dq=pla nck+1900+paper+shamos&source=bl&ots=Owm0_Jb87k&sig=t14iP41AcHLWMd4s CI6YXKILj6E&hl=en&sa=X&ei=yaUmU4SmGLOQ0QH19oCgCQ&ved=0CFUQ6AEwBg #v=onepage&q=planck%201900%20paper%20shamos&f=false .

[28] Planck, M, Nobel Lecture: The Genesis and Present State of Development of the Quantum Theory". Nobelprize.org. Nobel Media AB 2013. Web. 23 Feb 2014. < http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1918/plancklecture.html >

[29] Planck, M., On the Law of Distribution of Energy in the Normal Spectrum, Annalen der Physik, vol. 4, p. 553 (1901), see Whitener [4], http://people.isy.liu.se/jalar/kurser/QF/references/Planck1901.pdf
Page 33 of 42

[30] C. A. Gearhart, Planck, the Quantum, and Historians, Phys. Perspect. 4 (2002) 170215 http://employees.csbsju.edu/cgearhart/Planck/PQH.pdf [31] Badino, M., The Odd Couple: Boltzmann, Planck and the application of statistics to physics (1900-1913), pp. 17 to 27 (30 to 40 of 374) in Conference on History of Quantum Physics, Preprint 350 (2008). Excellent discussion of Boltzmann's 1877 paper, Planck's 1900 and subsequent papers, and also the Ehrenfest and Kammerlingh Ones (1915) arguments to explain the meaning of Plancks R in the expression for S. [32] Laxmanan, V., What is Entropy? Published June 3, 2012, http://www.scribd.com/doc/95728457/What-is-Entropy [33] Combinations and Permutations, Math is Fun,
http://www.mathsisfun.com/combinatorics/combinations-permutations.html

[34] Laxmanan, V., A Simple Test of Special Relativity and Discussion of Einsteins God Letter, http://www.scribd.com/doc/109540492/A-SimpleTest-of-Special-Relativity-and-A-Brief-Discussion-of-Einstein-s-God-Letterwithin-the-context-of-Krishna-Stories [35] Einstein, A., On a heuristic point of view about the creation and conversion of light, Annalen der Physik (1905). In Stachel, J. A., (1989), pp. 150-166,
http://www.ffn.ub.es/luisnavarro/nuevo_maletin/Einstein_1905_heuristic.pdf
Historians view the following, taken from the introduction to this paper, as the most revolutionary statement made in physics, especially, the last sentence here starting with according to this picture. In particular, black body radiation, photoluminescence, generation of cathode rays from ultraviolet light and other phenomena associated with the generation and transformation of light seem better modeled by assuming that the energy of light is distributed discontinuously in space. According to this picture, the energy of a light wave emitted from a point source is not spread continuously over ever larger volumes, but consists of a finite number of energy quanta that are spatially localized at points of space, move without dividing and are absorbed or generated only as a whole. See also http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_a_Heuristic_Point_of_View_about_the_Creation_and_Conver sion_of_Light

[36] The Photoelectric Effect, Great Experiments in Physics, Edited by Morris H. Shamos (Dover Publications, 1959), pp. 232-237. [37] Photoelectric Effect, The Physic Hyper Textbook, http://physics.info/photoelectric/ see an illustration of the movement of photoelectric measurements along parallels for different metals.

Page 34 of 42

[38] Stuewer, R. H., Einsteins revolutionary light quantum hypothesis, pp. 15 (pp. 14 to 18 of 374) in Conference on History of Quantum Physics,
Preprint 350 (2008), Christian Joas, Christoph Lehner, and Jrgen Renn (eds).

[39] Neuenschwander, D. E., Einsteins Quanta, Entropy, and the Photoelectric Effect, Excellent discussion about how Einstein arrives at his conception of light quanta by considering a property called entropy possessed by radiation in the form light, http://www.sigmapisigma.org/radiations/2004/elegant_connections_f04.pdf [40] Philipp Lenard Biographical, Nobelprize.org. Nobel Media AB 2013. Web. 23 Feb 2014. It is stated here that Lenard never forgave Einstein for discovering and attaching his own name to the photoelectric law < http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1905/lenard-bio.html > [41] Lenard, P. E., Nobel lecture, delivered on May 28, 1906, http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1905/lena rd-lecture.pdf It is, perhaps, of interest to note that Lenard does not cite Plancks December 1900 paper on blackbody radiation or the young and unknown Einsteins explanation for the cut-off frequency, published in 1905. Lenard provides an exhaustive list of the relevant literature in his Nobel lecture, through 1906. Perhaps, Lenard did not want to associate himself with the idea of light being discrete particles with an energy equal to the Planck quanta. [42] Albert Einstein: A Centennial Celebration of his Miraculous Year,
Photoelectric Effect and Light Quanta (Nice illustrations of the effect of intensity of light of different colors) https://faculty.etsu.edu/gardnerr/einstein/quanta.htm

[43] A Revolution in Physics; Einsteins Discoveries of 1905 Made Simple, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Published in 2005 http://www.tifr.res.in/~outreach/outreach/einstein.pdf [44] Fowler, M., The photoelectric effect, http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/252/photoelectric_effect.html [45] The photoelectric effect, Everything Physics, Optical Phenomena and Properties of Matter, http://m.everythingscience.co.za/grade-12/12-optical-phenomenaand-properties-of-matter/12-optical-phenomena-and-properties-of-matter-02.cnxmlplus

[46] The Physics Hyper Textbook, Photoelectric Effect, http://physics.info/photoelectric/

Page 35 of 42

[47] Masters, B. R., Albert Einstein and the Nature of Light, http://www.osaopn.org/home/articles/volume_23/july_august/features/albert_einstei n_and_the_nature_of_light/#.UywuOYVRKzg [48] Hahn, Otto, From Natural Transmutations of Uranium to it Artificial Fission, December 13,, 1946, http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/1944/h ahn-lecture.html Hahn gives a fascinating account of the arduous experiments performed jointly with Meitner and Strassman to identify the products produced by bombardment of uranium atom with slow neutrons. Eventually, it was confirmed that the uranium atom was breaking up into barium and an inert gas. Separately, Meitner and Frisch published the explanation of the breakup (using the Bohr liquid drop model) and the potential conversion of the small mass difference into a huge amount of energy following Einsteins E = mc2. [49] Laxmanan, V., Money in Economics is Just Like Energy in Physics, Extending Plancks law beyond Physics, Published January 14, 2013, http://www.scribd.com/doc/120324960/Money-in-Economics-is-Justlike-Energy-in-Physics-Extending-Planck-s-law-beyond-Physics [50] Laxmanan, V., Bibliography I of Articles by V. Laxmanan on the Extension of Plancks and Einsteins Ideas on Energy Quantum to Topics Outside Physics, compiled April 16, 2013, http://www.scribd.com/doc/136492067/Bibliography-I-Articles-onthe-Extension-of-Planck-s-Ideas-and-Einstein-s-Ideas-on-EnergyQuantum-to-topics-Outside-Physics-by-V-Laxmanan [51] Laxmanan, V., Bibliography II of Articles by V. Laxmanan on the Extension of Plancks and Einsteins Ideas Beyond Physics with Examples from the observations on financial, economic, social, and political systems, compiled June 16, 2013,
http://www.scribd.com/doc/147955814/Bibliography-II-of-V-Laxmanan-Articleson-the-Extension-of-Planck%E2%80%99s-and-Einstein%E2%80%99s-IdeasBeyond-Physics-with-Examples-from-the-Observations-on-Finan

[52] Laxmanan, V., A Dynamic Analysis of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerbergs (Bloomberg Billionaire) Net Worth Data, http://www.scribd.com/doc/212404370/A-DYNAMIC-ANALYSIS-OFPage 36 of 42

FACEBOOK-ZUCKERBERG-S-NET-WORTH-DATA-FROM-BLOOMBERGBILLIONAIRES-INDEX-CONFIRMS-THE-WORK-FUNCTION-FORWEALTH-GENERATION , Published March 14, 2014. [53] Laxmanan, V., Is Facebooks Mark Zuckerberg Possessed with the Work Function Voodoo? Published March 12, 2014, http://www.scribd.com/doc/212006104/IS-FACEBOOK-S-MARKZUCKERBERG-POSSESSED-BY-THE-WORK-FUNCTION-VODOO [54] Laxmanan, V., Mark Zuckerberg is Having a Great Year With Net Worth Up from $24.7B to $31.6B in 2014: Analysis of Daily Bloomberg Billionaires Data and Facebook Profits-Revenues (2009-2013), Published on March 13, 2014
http://www.scribd.com/doc/212199038/MARK-ZUCKERBERG-IS-HAVING-AGREAT-YEAR-WITH-NET-WORTH-UP-FROM-24-7B-TO-31-6B-IN-2014-ANALYSISOF-DAILY-BLOOMBERG-BILLIONAIRES-DATA-AND-FACEBOOKPRO?post_id=1189058830_10202393547458552#_=_ (Profits-Revenues

[55]

[56]

[57]

[58]

graphs for Facebook and the Breakeven Model, no work function.) Laxmanan, V., Facebook Profits and Revenues (2009-2013) and the Idea of a Work Function, Published March 13, 2014, http://www.scribd.com/doc/212244041/FACEBOOK-PROFITS-ANDREVENUES-2009-2013-AND-THE-IDEA-OF-A-WORK-FUNCTION Laxmanan, V., Limits to the Growth of the Average Net Worth of Billionaires: Significance of the Photoelectric Work Function, Published March 11, 2014, http://www.scribd.com/doc/211905138/LIMITS-TO-THE-GROWTHOF-THE-AVERAGE-NET-WORTH-OF-BILLIONAIRES-SIGNIFICANCE-OFTHE-GENERALIZED-PHOTOELECTRIC-WORK-FUNCTION (Facebook Profits-Revenues graph and breakeven model) Laxmanan, V., We Can All Learn from Bill Gates, Published March 7, 2014 http://www.scribd.com/doc/211146461/We-Can-All-LearnFrom-Bill-Gates Laxmanan, V., Bill Gates Personal Fortune and Einsteins Photoelectric Work Function, Published March 7, 2014, http://www.scribd.com/doc/211103258/BILL-GATES-PERSONALFORTUNE-AND-EINSTEIN-S-PHOTOELECTRIC-WORK-FUNCTION
Page 37 of 42

(Appendix II provides a discussion of the photoelectric law, the nonzero intercept c, the six cases of the linear law, y = hx + c, the generalized statement of the power-exponential law of Planck and the maximum point on profits-revenues curve.) [59] Laxmanan, V., On Billionaires and Wealth Generation: A Broad Generalization of Einsteins Photoelectric Work Function Outside Physics, Published March 6, 2014 (Formal journal article style) http://www.scribd.com/doc/210980525/On-Billionaires-and-WealthGeneration-A-Broad-Generalization-of-Einstein-s-Work-FunctionOutside-Physics Additional references have been added after first publication. They are included here to avoid revision of the reference numbers given in the original text. [60] Lorentz, H. A., Electromagnetic Phenomenon in a System Moving at any Velocity less than that of Light, in The Principle of Relativity, Dover Publications (1952), pages 11-34. In this paper, Lorentz has essentially derived the same equations as Einstein derives a year later, in his special relativity paper of 1905, Ref. [12], the difference being that Lorentz considers time to be an absolute quantity and consider the speed of light to be different for different observers. Hence, he is led to the conclusion of a strange variation in the mass of the electrons when we consider the forces acting in the longitudinal and the transverse directions (equation 30 on page 24). It is these equations that Einstein reproduces on page 63, with the remark that when comparing different theories for the motion of the electron, one must proceed very cautiously. [61] Lorentz, H. A., Theory of Electrons and the Propagation of Light, December 11, 1902, see extract below from Lorentzs Nobel lecture. http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1902/lore ntz-lecture.html [62] Thomson, J. J. Carriers of Negative Electricity, http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1906/tho
Page 38 of 42

[63]

[64]

[65]

[66]

mson-lecture.html This is the best explanation for the particle view of the electron; better than found in most physics textbooks. Thomson, G. P. Electronic Waves, June 7, 1938, http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1937/tho mson-lecture.html (J. J. Thomson, who received the Nobel Prize in 1906 for the discovery of the electron, and put forward the particle view, was in attendance when his son gave the Nobel lecture to put forward the wave view of the electron. The wave viewpoint was popular in Europe, before J. J. Thomson used the particle view and determined the mass/charge ratio for the particles that comprised the cathode rays.) Price, R., and Zizka, J., Experimental Determination of the Speed of light by the Foucault Method, http://www.phys.ksu.edu/personal/rprice/SpeedofLight.pdf The Speed of Light and Index of Refraction, http://www.rpi.edu/dept/phys/Dept2/APPhys1/optics/optics/node4. html The refractive index for lead is 2.6 and the speed of light is reduced to 1.2 x 108 m/s (or 2.6 x 108 miles per hour). High energy gamma rays travel for only a few centimeters before being completely absorbed. The speed of light, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light A summary of the measured values of the speed of light, first determined by the Danish astronomer Remer (by studying the eclipses of Io, the innermost of Jupiters moons), to the currently accepted value can be found here. The modern value is 299,792,458 m/s or 299,792.458 km/s. Unfortunately, physicists have now adopted the view that the speed of light is no longer to be considered a measured quantity (at the Geneva Conference on Weights and Measures, October 21, 1983, see Ref. [50]), but rather a defined quantity. Since the magnetic permeability is also taken as a defined quantity (0 = 4107 Hm1, Henry/meter), if the speed of light is also taken as a defined quantity, based on Maxwells theory of electromagnetism, the electrical permittivity 0 = 1/c20 also becomes a fixed quantity. This need NOT agree with experimental observations, if such observations are made sometime in the future, say in the 21st century or the 22nd century, using materials from a different planet of our own solar system (such as Mars, or Venus, or
Page 39 of 42

[67] [68]

[69]

[70]

Mercury), or our moon, or an asteroid, or if such an experiment can be conducted on an exoplanet, outside our solar system. Leon Foucault, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%A9on_Foucault McFarland, K., Speed of Light Demonstration by the Foucault Method, http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~pavone/particlewww/teachers/demonstrations/FoucaultDemonstration.htm A tube filled with water was inserted between the two mirrors to show that the speed of light in water is lower than in air. The exact of the two speeds, given later by Albert Michelson, was 1.33 and corresponds to the refractive index of water. Rotating mirror, Foucaults measurement of light speed in air and water, http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/33079/rotating-mirrorfoucaults-measurement-of-light-speed Historical Measurements of the Speed of Light, http://www.speedlight.info/measurement.htm Final quote here is of interest. However 1400
years ago it was stated in the Quran (Koran, the book of Islam) that angels travel in one day the same distance that the moon travels in 1000 lunar years, that is, 12000 Lunar Orbits / Earth Day. We discovered that when the geocentric frame is inertial 12000 Lunar Orbits / Earth Day becomes equivalent to the speed of light! See proof: Speed of Light.

[71] Speed of Light is 12000 lunar orbits per earth day, http://www.speedlight.info/speed_of_light_12000.htm The author provides a proof of this statement from the Koran which gives the distance traveled by angels in one earth day. In this method of stating the speed of light, 12000 lunar orbits is the distance traveled by light and time in which this distance is covered is one earth day. So, angels travel at the speed of light. It should be noted that numbers like 12000 also appears in the ancient Hindu scriptures such as the Srimad Bhagavatam which provides a description of the cosmic time scales and distances, see Srila Prabhupadas translations http://vedabase.com/en/sb/3/11 (see in particular 3.11.19). [72] Inertial reference frame, All inertial reference frames are in a state of constant rectilinear motion with respect to each other and accelerometer will detect no acceleration, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_frame_of_reference
Page 40 of 42

[73] Bergmann, P. G., Introduction to the theory of relativity (with foreword by Albert Einstein) Dover Publications (1976), see pages 28 to 38 for the mathematical derivation of the space and time relations. [74] Sir Isaac Newton, The Principia, Great Minds Series, Translated by Andrew Motte, Prometheus Books (1995). [75] Bose, S. N., Planck Law and Light Quantum Hypothesis, ZP (1924), 26, 178, http://master-mc.u-strasbg.fr/IMG/pdf/Bose_statistique.pdf Bose sent his paper to Einstein who had it translated and sent to the journal for publication, with a short comment at the very end. This led to Einstein to predict the existence of a new state of matter called the BEC, Bose-Einstein Condensate. Bose points out the logical flaw in the derivation, see Boses equation 1, which relies on classical physics for to deduce the term (82/c3) which is then multiplied by Plancks value for the average energy U. (The law derived using classical physics is called Rayleigh-Jeans law with kT replacing Plancks average U; see unnumbered equation given by Bose, following the first paragraph.) Boses re-derivation of the law shows that the entire radiation formula can be deduced without resorting to the classical theory. The statistical formula used by Bose is W = N!/N1! N2! N3! Nr! , see Gearharts review and Refs. [77, 78], permutations with repetitions. [76] Theimer, O., and Ram, B., The beginning of quantum statistics, Am. J. Phys., vol. 44, No. 11, pp. 1056-57, http://hermes.ffn.ub.es/luisnavarro/nuevo_maletin/Bose_1924.pdf [77] Delbrck, M., Was Bose-Einstein Statistics arrived at by Serendipity?, J. Chem. Education, vol. 57, No. 7, July 1980, pp. 467-470, The author received the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 1969 and was a pioneer in the field of molecular biology, http://users.physik.fuberlin.de/~pelster/Vorlesungen/WS1213/delbrueck.pdf See illustrations in Figures 1 to 3 of this paper which critique the method of counting used by Bose in his 1924 paper. [78] Permutations with Repetitions,
http://www.regentsprep.org/regents/math/algebra/apr2/LpermRep.htm

[79] Combinatorics and Probability,

Page 41 of 42

http://infolab.stanford.edu/~ullman/focs/ch04.pdf The formula used by Bose is found in the section 4.6, Orderings with Identical Items [80] The Multiplication Principle, Permutations and Combinations, http://dmc122011.delmar.edu/math/pjohnson/Webpage/businessmat h/notes/9.2.pdf [81] The Multiplication Principle, Permutations and Combinations http://www.mhhe.com/math/precalc/barnettpc5/graphics/barnett05 pcfg/ch10/others/bpc5_ch10-05.pdf

Page 42 of 42