Planck Equation and Wave motion:

Planck's equation doesn't define electromagnetic wave motion, but Planck units do, and the energy description invokes wave motion.

Planck units are a set of units of measurement defined exclusively in terms of four universal physical constants. Originally proposed by the German physicist Max Planck in 1899, these units are a system of natural units because their definition is based on properties of nature. It may be mentioned here that Einstein first published his special theory of relativity in 1905, which describes his revolutionary ideas about light, time and energy.

The four universal constants, by definition, have a numerical value of 1 when expressed in these units:

1. Speed of light in vacuum, c,
2. Gravitational constant, G,
3. Reduced Planck constant, ħ, and
4. Boltzmann constant, kB.

• Planck length = ℓP = L ≈ 1.61626 × 10^−35 m; 

• Planck time = tP = T ≈ 5.391247 × 10^−44 s; 

• ℓP/tP is the ratio of the Planck length to the Planck time;

Since, ℓP/tP = (1.61626 × 10^−35 m) / (5.391247 × 10^−44 s);

1. To divide two numbers in scientific notation, we subtract the exponents of the 10 and divide the coefficients:

2. Coefficient: (1.61626) / (5.391247) ≈ 0.299792458

3. Exponent: (10^(-35)) / (10^(-44)) = 10^(-35 - (-44)) = 10^9

4. So the simplified value is approximately:

5. 0.299792458 × 10^9 m/s

6. Now, we recognize that this is the speed of light in a vacuum, which is denoted by 'c':

7. c ≈ 2.99792458 × 10^8 m/s

8. So, the simplified expression is:

9. (1.61626 × 10^−35 m) / (5.391247 × 10^−44 s) ≈ 2.99792458 × 10^8 m/s;

The ratio of the Planck length to the Planck time (ℓP/tP) yields a value to the speed of light in a vacuum, c;

This is a fundamental constant in physics and is denoted by 'c'.

Planck equation conveys mass (m) invariant:

Planck equation E = hf conveys h constant but f variant, therefore mass (m) invariant.

            E          =          energy

h          =          Planck's constant
f           =          frequency

m         =          mass 

where m>0 in particle oscillation. 

Update: Here mass means where the atomic nucleus of matter is intact nuclear reaction, decay is not occurring.

Additional: Planck units are a set of units of measurement defined exclusively in terms of four universal physical constants. Originally proposed by the German physicist Max Planck in 1899, these units are a system of natural units because their definition is based on properties of nature. It may be mentioned here that Einstein first published his special theory of relativity in 1905, which describes his revolutionary ideas about light, time and energy.

The four universal constants, by definition, have a numerical value of 1 when expressed in these units:

1. • Speed of light in vacuum, c,

2. • Gravitational constant, G,

3. • Reduced Planck constant, ħ, and

4. • Boltzmann constant, kB.

• Planck length = ℓP = L ≈ 1.61626 × 10^−35 m; 

• Planck time = tP = T ≈ 5.391247 × 10^−44 s; 

• ℓP/tP is the ratio of the Planck length to the Planck time;

Since, ℓP/tP = (1.61626 × 10^−35 m) / (5.391247 × 10^−44 s);

1. To divide two numbers in scientific notation, we subtract the exponents of the 10 and divide the coefficients:

2. Coefficient: (1.61626) / (5.391247) ≈ 0.299792458

3. Exponent: (10^(-35)) / (10^(-44)) = 10^(-35 - (-44)) = 10^9

4. So the simplified value is approximately:

5. 0.299792458 × 10^9 m/s

6. Now, we recognize that this is the speed of light in a vacuum, which is denoted by 'c':

7. c ≈ 2.99792458 × 10^8 m/s

8. So, the simplified expression is:

9. (1.61626 × 10^−35 m) / (5.391247 × 10^−44 s) ≈ 2.99792458 × 10^8 m/s;

The ratio of the Planck length to the Planck time (ℓP/tP) yields a value to the speed of light in a vacuum, c;

This is a fundamental constant in physics and is denoted by 'c'.

Relativistic physics is unrelated to classical, and quantum physics, applied mathematics:

In applied mathematics, classical physics, and quantum mechanics, the domains of space and time are indeed considered fundamental aspects of the physical universe. Although they are represented mathematically, their existence and role in shaping physical phenomena is well established and supported by experimental evidence and experimental observations. 

In terms of applied mathematics, space and time are indeed abstract and conceptual constructs or imaginary. They are represented mathematically using coordinates and metrics to describe the location and relationship between objects and events.

Between classical physics and quantum mechanics, space and time are considered fundamental aspects of our physical universe. They provide the framework in which all physical events occur and are essential for describing the behavior of matter and energy.

While space and time do not interact in the same way as particles or energy do, they are interconnected in classical physics and quantum mechanics. The behavior of particles and matter described by classical mechanics, quantum mechanics depend on the geometry of space and time.

Space and time play an important role in shaping the behavior of the universe in both classical physics and quantum mechanics. They are used to formulate equations of motion, determine energy and momentum, and understand the evolution of physical systems over time.

In classical physics and in many aspects of quantum mechanics, space and time are treated as invariant. This means that the laws of physics remain consistent regardless of the observer's position or orientation.

The concept of spacetime, as described specifically in the context of relativistic physics, is not necessarily relevant to this domain. Instead, classical and quantum theories address the behavior of matter in space and time without the need for a unified spacetime structure.

#relativity #ClassicalPhysics, #quantumphysics #AppliedMathematics

The reasons behind emphasising Max Planck:

There is a deeper reason behind why I emphasized Max Planck.

The first thing I want to mention is the equation E= hf. It is a great equation to represent the whole universe and the universe is very clearly understood. It was a very pure and fundamental kind of discovery by Max Planck. Max Planck was a pioneering physicist who made significant advancements in our understanding of the universe, particularly in the realm of quantum mechanics.

In my opinion, Planck's energy-frequency equivalence provides a better understanding of the entire universe than the energy-mass equivalence E=mc^2 presented by Einstein. The equation E=hf, where E represents energy, h is Planck's constant, and f is frequency, is a fundamental equation in quantum mechanics. It relates the energy of a photon or any quantum particle to its frequency. This equation was a groundbreaking discovery and laid the foundation for quantum theory, which is crucial in understanding the behavior of particles at the smallest scales.

I have a very strong feeling that the main concept of energy-mass equivalence was developed from Max Planck's concept of energy-frequency equivalence. My argument that Planck's energy-frequency equivalence provides a better understanding of the entire universe than Einstein's energy-mass equivalence (E=mc^2). It’s important to clarify that they are not competing concepts but rather complementary. E=mc^2 is a special case of the more general energy-momentum relation in relativistic physics. It shows the equivalence between energy (E) and mass (m) and is crucial in understanding the energy released in nuclear reactions and the concept of mass-energy conversion

Frequency is a more fundamental representation of the universe than mass, so to understand the universe as a whole, and to understand it in an intelligent way, express the universe in terms of energy and frequency rather than energy and mass. Planck's energy-frequency equivalence is essential for understanding the quantum behavior of particles, particularly in the context of photons and the quantization of energy levels in quantum systems.

However, energy-mass equivalence is more necessary for the benefit of local human society, whereas Max Planck's energy-frequency equivalence is more useful for understanding the universe as a whole in a novel way. Though energy-frequency equivalence is a more fundamental representation of the universe compared to energy-mass equivalence, but it's worth noting that both concepts are fundamental in their own right, and they emerge from different physical theories.

The fact is, everything in the universe can be represented by energy-frequency, and its energy level determines the amount of entropy. I think that if energy-frequency equalization is considered a treatment for intelligent human species, and then energy-mass might be a good alternative for treating monkeys, chimpanzees, or even more primitive species. Entropy is a concept from thermodynamics/statistical mechanics that describes the level of disorder or randomness in a system. It is related to the number of ways in which the microscopic constituents of a system can be arranged, given its macroscopic properties (e.g., temperature, pressure, volume). Entropy is a measure of the system's uncertainty or the distribution of energy among its various degrees of freedom.

A comparison between the energy-frequency and energy-mass relations, as it seems to me, the former is much better than the latter, but, for some unscientific reason, the energy-mass equivalence is unreasonably more popular in society, instead of the energy-frequency equivalence. Energy-frequency equivalence is more specific to the realm of quantum mechanics and finds applications in understanding the behavior of photons, electrons, and other elementary particles. While quantum mechanics has been incredibly successful in describing the microscopic world, its concepts and principles are often counterintuitive and can be more challenging to grasp for the general public.

I think it is more a social acceptance than a scientific one, between the two principles, and obvious to the average mind.

Planck units are another aspect of Max Planck as described in my post, where the Planck length, Planck time, and Planck frequency represent our limit in understanding of the universe, where beyond the Planck frequency the source of Euclidean geometry begins to vibrate, and some frequency beyond that threshold are forever imperceptible to us. Planck units are derived from fundamental constants such as the speed of light, Planck's constant, and the gravitational constant. These units represent the scale at which quantum effects and gravitational interactions become significant. The Planck length, Planck time, and Planck frequency are the respective scales at which our current understanding of physics breaks down, and the effects of gravity and quantum mechanics cannot be neglected.

So the Planck time or frequency plays an important role in determining the limits of our perception. Both energy-mass equivalence and energy-frequency equivalence are valuable concepts in physics, applicable in different domains and with different levels of generality. They are not mutually exclusive but rather complementary in our quest to understand the universe at both macroscopic and microscopic scales.

Space itself does not expand but the distance between physical bodies increase due to dark energy:

Space itself is not a physical entity in the same sense as matter or objects. Space is a mathematical and conceptual framework used to describe the relationships and distances between physical bodies. 

When we talk about the expansion of the universe, we are referring to the observed phenomenon where the distances between galaxies and clusters of galaxies increase over time. This expansion is described mathematically using various parameters and metrics.

While the term "stretching" is often used in the context of describing the expansion of the universe, it is important to understand that it is not a literal stretching of physical space, as space itself is not a physical substance. Rather, it is an expansion of the distances between physical objects within the conceptual framework of space.

The driving force behind the expansion of the universe is thought to be dark energy, which is a hypothetical form of energy that is thought to permeate the universe and contribute to its accelerated expansion. Dark energy is postulated to exert a repulsive gravitational effect, causing galaxies and clusters of galaxies to move apart from each other.

Observational evidence, such as the redshift of distant galaxies, supports the notion of the expanding universe, but is not a literal stretching of physical space, as space itself is not a physical substance. This redshift is interpreted as a result of the expansion of space, causing the light from distant objects to be stretched to longer wavelengths. 

• The expansion of the universe refers to the increase in distances between physical objects within the conceptual framework of space.

• The term "stretching" is indeed used as a metaphorical description of the expansion of the universe. It helps to convey the idea that the distances between galaxies and clusters of galaxies increase over time, resulting in the observed redshift of light from distant objects.

• The driving force behind the accelerated expansion of the universe is commonly attributed to dark energy, a theoretical form of energy that is postulated to permeate space. Dark energy is hypothesized to exert a repulsive gravitational effect, causing the expansion of the universe to accelerate and leading to the increased separation between galaxies.

• Observational evidence, including the redshift of light from distant galaxies, supports the concept of an expanding universe. The redshift is a result of the stretching of the wavelength of light as space expands, and it provides valuable insights into the dynamics of the universe.