Date: Jun 4, 1998 2:23 PM
Author: Adrian Cable
Subject: Re: A mathematical derivation of Planck's Constant



> It does not matter how long you have been doing physics and
> mathematics you still might save yourself future embarrassment by
> taking the  time to do some in depth research on what a joule is. I'll
> give you a tip look up the word "joule" in the Random House
> dictionary.  It is defined as unit of work in meter-kilogram-second.
> It is NOT defined in "newton meters, which is kilogram meters squared
> per second squared". A newton is a unit of force and joule is a work

Please, do not insult my ability to read dictionaries, or my ability to
perform correct physical calculations. A joule is defined as a newton
metre (or a newton meter, if you'd prefer the American, as opposed to
British, spelling). However, a newton itself is defined as a kilogram
metre per second squared in what is called the "MKS system", which is
ONE WAY of expressing units, therefore a joule is also equivalent to a
kilogram metre squared per second squared, which is actually what I
originally said. By units matching, they must be equivalent - one
particular unit can often be expressed in terms of many other units if
you so desire, and it just happens, as I have shown above, that the
newton metre is equal to the kilogram metre squared per second squared.
However, it does not happen that the newton metre is equal to the newton
metre per second, which is what your equations actually say, if you can
be bothered to read them.

> or energy. Even a man of your advance understanding of the physics and
> mathematics must be able to recognize that there is difference and
> that these units do not match.  In light of this added information

Which units are you saying do not match?

> would you like to reevaluate your assessment of the proof given
> earlier with regards to the  mismatching of units.

No, I would not like to re-evaluate my assessment of the proof, unless
you can show me where my units do not match, or why your theory can be
unlike every other physical theory in that it is somehow able to be
correct without being correct with respect to units.

Another thing which should give you a clue. I've made repeated posts on
this topic, and so have you. Just count up the number of people who say
I am wrong, and the number of people who say you are wrong. You will
find the former quantity is zero.

Thanks, cheers,
Adrian Cable.