Planck's constant is irrelevant..

I know this is mildly off-topic, but... I've just been reading a paper called The Transitional Quantum State of Matter, published last year and "adapted from the theory of Frank Znidarsic."

And, I must say, I am very impressed. I especially want to call attention to page 13 (though, the rest should be read first).

reply to post by CLPrime


The meters per second and hertz meters I think are the same thing I used meters per second to make it more understandable but I think frank uses hertz meters because it is a wave.

Ah nice PDF it pretty much puts that video series on paper.

reply to post by mb2591


After reading that paper, I'm pretty sure he uses hertz-meters because the constant that involves those units is a measure of harmonic oscillation. In the case of a wave, hertz is frequency and meters is wavelength, and the two multiplied gives the velocity of the wave, which is meters-per-second. But, in the case of harmonic oscillation, it does not describe proper velocity... it describes cycles over distance, which is hertz-meters.

And, again, I am impressed.

Originally posted by CLPrime
I know this is mildly off-topic, but... I've just been reading a paper called The Transitional Quantum State of Matter, published last year and "adapted from the theory of Frank Znidarsic."

Who is(are) the author(s)?

I don't see an author's name on the paper, did I miss it?

reply to post by Arbitrageur


The author appears to be someone who goes by the name Alien Scientist. However, despite the name, much of the information presented on their website seems legitimate (note, there's a difference between "legitimate" and "right").
Here is the link to the pages on Znidarsic's work.
The site even includes a summary of all information covered in an undergraduate degree in physics and mathematics.

Originally posted by CLPrime
The author appears to be someone who goes by the name Alien Scientist. However, despite the name, much of the information presented on their website seems legitimate (note, there's a difference between "legitimate" and "right").
Here is the link to the pages on Znidarsic's work.
The site even includes a summary of all information covered in an undergraduate degree in physics and mathematics.

Thanks, I wouldn't trust anything alien scientist said. He's not extremely stupid*, just extremely gullible, he believes all kinds of crazy nonsensical completely made up BS.

And most of what I've seen from him isn't even close to legitimate. Here's an example, alienscientist is the narrator in this video and it's 100% complete and total BS:

Quantum Gravity Unification of Strong Nuclear Force

*Pay attention at 3:45 when he says "The entire mass of the universe inside every single atom", should I retract my statement that he's not extremely stupid? That sentence isn't even internally consistent with itself. But that's what Haramein's theory proposes and Alienscientist doesn't even seem to question it. In fact how he can say anything in that video with a straight face makes me completely lose all respect for him. It's all demonstrably false.

Here's another video by alienscientist, it's got a tiny amount of incidental facts thrown in but it's mostly complete fantasy:

TR-3B Plasma Torus Anti-Gravity Centrifuge Engine

Those two videos are neither right NOR legitimate. And judging from the other 100 or so videos he has up on youtube, most of them look bogus. I'm pretty familiar with most of those topics and just looking at the titles, it looks pretty much like it's all bullocks.

Here's 95 more videos from "AlienScientist" who clearly is no scientist, or if he is, he's very bad at it:
www.youtube.com.../u

Alienscientist, like Nassim Haramein, does manage to say something right once in a while, when they quote a textbook or something like that. But neither one has any credibility. How can anyone think the entire mass of the universe is inside every single atom? The both say that and frankly it doesn't even make any sense.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


Nice. That's good to know...I've never heard of him before (which is surprising, really).
However, the paper I linked to encompasses Znidarsic's work, and, if it impresses me, then it could have merit. Mind you, I'm going on a single reading of the work, so I haven't actually checked the math or method yet (and, even without doing so, I've already found what I believe is a rather ridiculous math error in one of the calculations). I'll have to do that, as well as consider its ramifications in other areas of Quantum Mechanics, before I even think about endorsing the theory. Not that anyone cares whether or not I endorse a theory. Though, maybe they should

The more fundamantal constant is the fine structure constant (alpha):

en.wikipedia.org...

It's a combination of Plank's constant (hbar=h/(2*pi)), fundamental unit of charge (e), and the speed of light (c).

Also, no matter what convetion you choose for units .. alpha is always unitless! It's been called a God given number, for that reason. Some think if we can figure out what alpha is all about, we'd have all the answers.

If you work in natural units, hbar=c=1, you can work in a single scale of mass or energy, so the equations become:

E=m , and E=f, etc.

There was a test recently where they thougt they might have detected a varation in alpha. This would be a BIG deal if true. I'll see if I can't find a link for that.

There's a cool legend behind alpha too, that might be true. alpha is approximately 1/137. Apparently, Pauli (of Pauli's Exclusion Principle) fell ill and was being wheeled into a hospital room when he noticed the room number was 137. He grabbed the door jam and looked up and said he was never coming out of that room alive. And, he didn't!

Here it is:

Variations in fine-structure constant suggest laws of physics not the same everywhere