This equation is the foundation of
Quantum Theory, but it has a mathematical
flaw
that is actually pretty easy to
understand. This flaw has a very large
effect on Quantum Mechanics, which is
currently being used to engineer quantum
computers. So why is the Quantum Flaw a
big deal?
First, it unifies the dual physics models
that we have today. Classical physics--
which describes large objects like
people and planets, and then we have
Quantum Physicsm which describes the
physics of the microscopic world like
subatomic particles. And when you
understand the idea of the Quantum Flaw,
then you can get rid of classic and
quantum and just have physics that
describes the entire world. It also
clarifies the weird Quantum Mechanics
descriptions that you may have heard of,
like wave-particle duality, state
superposition, and quantum entanglement.
These are all things that basically go
away once we understand how the Quantum
Flaw affects Quantum Mechanics, and today
the quantum computer engineer believes
that those are natural states. And the
quantum flaw will help show that things
like state superposition and
entanglement are not natural states of
how the microscopic world works. All
right, what I want to try to do is make
this understandable to anybody that was
interested in clicking the link. I'm
going to start by using basic overviews
of all the topics, and try to explain all
the technical terms.  And hopefully, keep
this at, basically, a high school level.
And then, I'm going to show all my
sources, so if you want to investigate
further, you'll have that. And this is
what we're going to cover.
This stretches over about a 50-year
period of time, but when we're done, we'll
have an idea--a really good idea--of how
this Quantum Flaw affects all of Quantum
Mechanics. Ok, so the problem is that this
equation right here is hard-coded to one
second. Now, what is this equation? So, this
equation basically started the idea of
Quantum Theory, and it is now considered
the equation of the energy of a photon,
and a photon being the quantum of light
or a particle of light. And you're going to
see it in a couple of forms. This is the
original form was E = h (and what we
would say) v -- that's actually the
lowercase Greek letter of NU, or
nowadays, you might see it as E = hf
which is F, in this case frequency, and
they both mean the same thing. If you're
not familiar with math, that's alright.
I'm gonna try to explain all of these
things, and you can see here a lot of the
math symbols are either Greek uppercase
or lowercase. And, in this particular case,
V is NU.  To continue with more
definitions the E in this equation
stands for energy. For such a common word,
it's really not that easy for me to
describe exactly what energy is.
I just basically think of it as what's
needed to make things move.  H is Planck's
constant.
I know it's pronounced "plunk"... but my
accent. I've always said "plank" so we'll
have to all to deal with that. Planck's
constant really becomes the star of the
show, once you get done beating down this
equation and figuring out its flaws. This
is really what Quantum means.
So what does the h stand for in 
Planck's constant? And I've read that it
means "auxilary" or "helper" in German. And
why would it mean that? It's because when
he created this constant, he had no idea
what it really meant. This is an English
to German translation of "auxilary" and
"helper." Again, it's interesting because
Planck did not know what this constant
meant, and it ends up being the star of
the show. And we'll be going further into
how H came about. And then we have the
frequency of light, so that's either V
which stands for vibrations, F for frequency
...these are the same things -- undulations,
oscillations, waves -- that's all in the
same category of frequency. And then we
have light, which means the visible light
that we see, but it also means the entire
electromagnetic spectrum. So if we go
into what physics would call the "high
energy" part of the spectrum, then we're
talking about x-rays and gamma rays, and
we know now that those can be dangerous
to us. And then if we go toward what
physics would call "lower energy" light,
then we're talking about microwaves and
radio waves.
This is a common picture of the
electromagnetic spectrum, and so when I
say light we're talking about all of
this...
Not just the visible portion, but the
entire spectrum. And if you check
Wikipedia, you'll see that this equation
is known by a few different names, and it
also explains that a photon is a type of
elementary particle. And the photon
energy of this equation is the energy
carried by a single photon. And we are
going to prove that to be incorrect, when
you understand the quantum flaw.
Frequency.. so this is the one that locks
this equation into a 1 second equation.
Frequency is defined as cycles per
second, and when you look at "per second"
that pretty much defines that you need
to wait for one second of time for all
the cycles to come through... All of the
waves... or all of the oscillations. And
more familiar term we use for frequency,
today is MegaHertz and GigaHertz and
these are used to describe our
electronics that we use today, like our
phones or computers or Wi-Fi routers. And
we generally relate it to some kind of a
speed. So MegaHertz stands for million
cycles per second and GigaHertz stands
for billion cycles per second. This is an
example of frequency. What I have here is
a metronome, and it's set to 240 beats
per minute which translates to 4 beats
per second.  4 beats per second being
analogous to 4 cycles per second,
which is 4 Hertz.
So you can see that it takes one second
of time in order to get all four cycles
for this four Hertz frequency. I'll do
that again. So you can see that if you're
using a Hertz frequency in an equation,
that it takes one full second worth of
time in order to get all of the cycles
to come through. Now what I'm going to do
is only allow a half-second worth of
time to elapse. You get two cycles. Now
this is still a 4 Hertz frequency, but
what I'm doing is changing the time to a
half a second, and we're only going to
get two cycles. Now why is this important?
Because, if you DO NOT have a time
variable right here, then you're locking
yourself into that one second. If you
have a time variable that says, okay, I
can put in one half a second...
Well, that makes sense, because now the
energy value here is based on this one
second, and then you're dividing it by
two, which makes it a half a second. Let's
bring out the metronome again, and now we
can pull together everything that is on
this slide.
We'll put H right here and then V is the
frequency represented by our 4 Hertz
sample here. Each one of these is an
oscillation, so what HV is telling us is
that H gets added to each
oscillation in the cycle. Or another way
to put it is... H is multiplied by the
number of cycles of the particular
frequency. Now I still haven't told you
what H is, but right now just think of it
as a number. Let me redraw H right here...
And now we're going to do a 4 Hertz
cycle, but we're going to stop it at a
half a second. And you're only going to
get H twice. So to represent this case
mathematically, we have H multiplied by V,
which is 4 Hertz, and you have to add a
time variable. And what the time variable
allows us to do is to put the 1/2 second
into the equation. So then, we would read
this as H times V, which is four of these
H's. And then you multiply 1/2, which is
the same as dividing by two, and that
brings us back to the two cycles of this
1/2 second example. So you can see, when
you add this time variable, it basically
unlocks this equation from being stuck
at one second. But that time variable is
not there! It's missing. So this equation
is stuck at 1 second or hard coded to
one second. OK...
At this point, you should be getting a
sense that 'yeah, something doesn't seem
right here' because if the energy of a
photon, or the quantum particle of light,
is based on one second's worth of time...
that seems weird. And we can measure the
speed of light which is 300 million
meters per second, or 300,000 kilometers
per second, or 186 thousand
miles per second. So what this
is saying, if the energy of a photon
takes one second, then it's also 300
million meters long, which is basically
the distance from the earth to the moon!
Now, that just doesn't seem right. So at
this point, I'm hoping that you see what
I'm talking about here, but I'm also
hoping that you're skeptical. Right?
Because you should be thinking something
like this seems too obvious, and why
wouldn't our genius scientists have
already figured this out over the last
120 years. And I think that skepticism is
perfectly normal at this point. So we're
going to keep hammering against this
equation, because there's more to learn
here. And now we're going to see that
this equation is unbalanced. The purpose
of a math equation is to show that this
side is equal to that side. And if you
look at this equation and just look at
the letters E does not equal HV, so how
do you know that this equation is true?
How do you know that this equation is
actually mathematically balanced?
One way to do that in mathematics is to
use a process called dimensional
analysis or unit analysis. Let's do a
quick overview of unit analysis or
dimensional analysis. And so, in Wikipedia if
you type in unit analysis, it will
redirect you to dimensional analysis. So
what this does is take these symbols
that we have in the equation, and it
substitutes in the actual units of
measure that we use, like seconds or
meters or kilograms. Using E as an
example for energy, dimensional analysis
turns the kilograms into M for mass, for
meters it turns into an L, and for
seconds it turns it into a T. My personal
preference is that this is an extra step
that isn't needed. And if we look up
energy... and you can see the SI base units
of kilogram, meters, and seconds. That is
the way I prefer to do the analysis...
using the units, the SI base units, versus
changing them into dimensions. So if we
look at the units associated with the
variables in this equation, you'll see we
have the energy unit, which is a Joule.
Planck's constant has a unit of Joule
second, and frequency, as we now know, has
a unit of per second or Hertz. So then we
just substitute these units into the
equation. So we have for energy, Joule...
For Planck's constant...
Joule-second. Now, I put this above a one,
just to make it more symmetric with the
frequency unit. Now, we can just do basic
algebra to simplify the units, and we'll
cancel out the second. The 1's will
basically disappear, and you get Joule
equals Joule. So you can see that E
equals HV, because when we do the unit
analysis, we get Joule = Joule, or
all the units match and balance on each
side of the equal sign. Typically, this is
how you're going to see unit analysis
done on this equation. But obviously,
since the title here says unbalanced
equation, then something else must be
wrong. So we have to go back to the
frequency unit and realize that Hertz is
really not 1 over second... it's Cycles
over Seconds or Cycles per Second. We've
already learned about that part of the
Quantum Flaw, so when we substitute in
Cycles per Second for Hertz, we get a
different answer. So we can cancel out
the seconds, or you can write it a
similar way, which would be breaking the
Cycles out and putting per Second there,
but either way, you get the same answer.
And that is, Joule does not equal Joule-
Cycles. We are left with the Cycles term
in the Hertz unit, but mathematics does
not do it that way. If you compare
frequency, of cycles per second, to speed...
as meters per second...
Let's do a quick analogy here. So you
would cross out the Seconds... simple
algebra... and get Joule Meters. We would
not throw away the meters in this
instance. So WHY do we throw away the
cycles? The one-second flaw in this
equation not only broke our idea of a
photon, but it also broke math. We should
not be throwing away the Cycles term,
because it is physical information. So I
think you can see that there is
definitely a problem here with E equals
HV, and I encourage you not to just
believe this information. So you could
potentially test this on your own.
If you know someone that is good at math,
or interested in science, you can take
this problem to them. And most likely, if
they do dimensional analysis on the
energy of a photon equation, it's going
to probably end up looking like this. But
then, you can question them about the
Cycles term, and maybe the answer will be...
"Well, we don't do it that way."  Then you
could say, "Well, what if you put in Meters
per Second in place of Cycles per Second,
why wouldn't you just throw away the
meters?" So WHY do we throw away Cycles?
That action causes us to believe that E
equals HV is a balanced equation, when
in reality... it is not! Okay,
so let's review the last 20 minutes of
the problem in about 30 seconds. So on
Wikipedia we can read that frequency is
the number of occurrences of a repeating
event, or Cycle per unit of Time. And the
common symbols are F, V... the unit of
measure is in Hertz, and the base unit is
Second to the -1 power, which is
another way of writing 1 over Seconds.
Now, when we look at Hertz, you can see
that it is defined as Cycles per ONE
Second, and it is written as 1 over
Second, instead of Cycles per ONE Second.
And you understand the problem that we
are throwing away the Cycles. And you
understand the problem,
if Cycles per 1 Second is in an equation
without another time variable, then
you're locking the equation into one
second time frame. So this is what we're
gonna do now.  I'm hoping that by this
point you can see both problems with the
frequency term in this equation. But
right now, we haven't really talked about
H. So before we get to correcting the
problems with the frequency term and
understanding the true meaning of this,
we need to talk about H. To learn about H,
we've got to go back to 1901 and 1905
and look at the works of Max Planck and
Albert Einstein. At that point, we should be able
to understand how H came about, and the
importance of H and this equation, in
terms of Quantum Theory. Max Planck won a
Nobel Prize by solving the blackbody
radiation problem. Let's do a quick
overview of what this blackbody
radiation problem
is. I'm gonna use a PHET simulation from
Colorado University. The blackbody
radiation problem is to try to figure
out the relationship between the
temperature of an object and the amount
of energy that is radiated outward from
that object. So when we turn up the
temperature over here to let's say this
light bulb, which would be the heating of
a small tungsten wire, you can see over
here that this curve starts to move
upward. And if we keep heating up the
temperature... to let's say the temperature
of our Sun, you can see that the energy
underneath this curve keeps growing. They
were trying to create mathematical
formulas that would describe this curve
based on the experimental data that they
were receiving from these black body
radiation devices. And from 1860 to 1900
the technologies kept improving to take
better measurements, and some formulas
were working in certain ways and failing
in other ways, and this is what Max
Planck did. He was able to create a
mathematical formula that fit this curve,
which was created by the experimental
data. And there are a lot of good
resources that go into much more detail
about this problem, and it's actually a
pretty fascinating problem that science
was able to solve. Now, let's look at the
paper from Max Planck that got him the
Nobel Prize. This is from archive.org and
is an English translation of the
original 1901 paper. If we scroll down to
Page 6...
you'll see, this is the debut of HV. The
energy element, and this is a lowercase
epsilon, must be proportional to the
frequency of V. So the question might be...
"Since we now know that HV is 1 second's
worth of energy, and Max Planck uses HV
in his formulas that solve the blackbody
radiation curve that we just saw in the
previous PHET simulation, why is the 1
second energy of HV working in the
situation?" To answer that we have to look
at the actual experimental data. So HV
worked in this case, because the data
sampled for the blackbody radiation
curve was 1 second's worth of data. And
when we look back here at Max Planck's
paper, we can see in the numerical value
section of his paper, that he takes the
universal constants and turns them into
numerical values. Now we haven't talked
about K yet, but it's known as the
Boltzmann's constant and we'll talk
about it a little bit more later. But the
interesting thing is that Max Planck
found both H, which is now known as
Planck's constant, and K, which is known
as Boltzmann's constant, in this paper!
That's pretty amazing. So this is where
he's taking the blackbody radiation
measurement data and plugging it into
the equation. So let's read this sentence
that describes the data. The total energy
radiating into the air from 1 Centimeter
square of blackbody at temperature T in
Celcius in ONE SECOND. So that is showing
that when they sample this data, it is 1
second's worth of data... and it's in the
form of WATTs.
So let's look at what a Watt is. So a
watt is a unit of power, and it is one
Joule per Second. Again, we have something
that's very similar to the unit of
frequency, which was Hertz. Here we have a
unit of power, which is Watts, and it's
Joule, or that energy, per Second... very
similar to what we learned about Cycles
per Second. Now you can see the Watt is a
per Second value, and then something
interesting happens right here. So these
units must equal these units. Now this is
important, so we have to see how you get
from Watts per Centimeter squared - ERG
per Centimeter squared Second. If we have
Watt per Centimeter square, we can take
this word WATT and substitute in ERG
per Second. Now what's an ERG? An ERG is
another measurement unit of energy, and
it was used prior to what we use now,
which is Joule. So then we have to
simplify this, and we can use algebrarules
.com to help us. So when you have
this fraction up here, then you'll end up
with this, which is ERG over Centimeters
squared Second. Now, I'm highlighting the
second here in red, because the data,
Watts per Centimeter squared, is actually
one second's worth of data from the
experiment, and that is what Max Planck's
equations are fit to. Now we can scroll
through this section and go to the end
and see the actual value of H. And if you
look at the units, you can still see that
there's this lingering SECOND. And since
H has units of
energy and time, this is known as the
Quantum of Action. Later, we're going to
look at this a little closer and see
that that's a big deal. We're gonna find
that there's a mistake in the units for
H, and that is actually going to change
everything!
So to summarize, you can see that the
blackbody radiation experiment collected
data in units of Energy per Second or
Watts. HV worked in these equations,
because it is also a per Second equation.
Interestingly, H was not something that
anyone was looking for.
Max Planck has a quote saying that it
was an "act of despair" because he needed
to figure out a mathematical solution at
all costs. So at first, it was thought
that maybe this is just a mathematical
trick. But what it's saying is that
Nature has a discrete, discontinuous or a
point-like quality to it... and it just
can't be divided into smaller pieces.
This was NOT a very popular idea at the
time but regardless H started the
quantum theory of nature, and one person
that took this idea seriously was Albert
Einstein. And in 1905, he proposed the
idea of light quanta or what we call
today the photon. So if we learned that
the outgoing radiated light energy was
quantized, then the next question might
be... what happens to that light energy
when it gets absorbed or when its
incoming? This is the paper that Albert
Einstein wrote in 1905...one of the papers
he wrote in 1905, and it's from his
collection at Princeton University.
This is the paper that he won the Nobel
Prize for, well it wasn't just for this,
but it's called out specifically. And
we'll be looking in detail at the law of
the photoelectric effect, because he used
HV in this equation. The basic idea of
the paper is that the wave theory of
light does a good job at describing
nature in certain aspects, but learning
from the blackbody radiation results,
maybe it's best to look at light as
particles. This might help us describe
things like the photoelectric effect,
which the classical wave theory of light
does not describe properly. So this sets
up a new round of wave-particle duality
for light. We''ll go to the section of this
paper that describes the photoelectric
effect, but there you won't see the
equation HV. I have to take a little bit
of time to decipher the equation that's
there. So section 8 of this paper
describes the photoelectric effect. But
as you can see, this is not HV. So I'll
show you how this turns into HV. First, we
have to figure out what R/N is. In the
first section of this paper, we find R/N.
R is the universal gas constant. N is now
known as the Avogadro's number. To figure
out what this means, we need to go look
back at another Max Planck paper. This is
Max Planck's paper that he published
just before the one we looked at earlier.
On page 6, you'll see right here is
Avogadro's number. If you fit that into
this equation, you'll find that R over N
is actually equal to K, which is
Boltzmann's constant. So back to the
photoelectric equation,
we need to figure out what Beta is. So in
Section 2 of Einstein's paper, Beta is
equal to this number. We have to go back
to Planck's 1901 paper to see that H
over K is equal to this number. And that
is what Beta is in Albert Einstein's
paper. So if R/N is equal to K or the
Boltzmann's constant and Beta is equal
to H over the Boltzmann's constant, then
the K's cancel out and you're just left
with HV.  Now, why did he do this?
I don't know.  So what is the
photoelectric effect. A simple definition
would be something like this. You shine
an ultraviolet light onto a metal, like
zinc, and electrons will leave that metal.
And here's a quick visual of the
photoelectric effect. Ultraviolet light
will shine down on this zinc plate, and
electrons will be ejected over to the
detector. Now we can go to the next page
of Albert Einstein's paper and look at
the photoelectric effect equation. We now
know that this is equal to H, but what is
P? This is now known as the work function.
The idea is that an electron will need
some amount of energy to reach the
surface and be ejected from the surface
of the metal. The idea of the work
function came from Owen Richardson who
was working on thermionic emission. In
both cases you have electrons leaving
the metal, but thermionic is by means of
heating up that metal, while
photoelectric does not use heat.
Thermionic emission is how our old
televisions used to work with the CRTs
or electron guns. You heat up a wire like
tungsten to a very hot temperature and
it creates electrons that you can direct
toward the screen. On page 2, he
describes the idea of the work function
work done by a corpuscle, which was the
original name for the electron, in
passing through the surface layer and
escaping from the metal surface. One
thing to note is that the work function
is really a concept or an idea. We don't
have a mathematical formula that can
predict the ejection of an electron. We
do have a table of energy values that we
plug in for this work function, and those
values are based on experimental data.
Okay, so this is the sentence that
describes the photon. The entire energy
of the light quantum and the energy of
the light quantum this is HV from Max
Planck's blackbody radiation paper. We
also know that experiment was based on
one second data and this formula is a
one second formula. So the energy of this
photon is 1 seconds worth of energy, but
we know that it does not take one second's
worth of time for the photoelectric
effect to occur. When we shine
ultraviolet light on the metal, the
effect happens immediately. So now you
can see the problem with the equation
for the photoelectric effect and the
overall equation for the energy of a
photon. But at this point we have a
second example of Quantum Theory
explaining natural phenomenon.
This was another step in terms of
physics splitting between a classical
view versus the new or modern Quantum
view. But if I'm suggesting that all of
this stuff is wrong, then what is the
right answer?
And for that we will look at a unified
view of light using E = HV. The
first thing we have to answer is what is
H. Let's try some new calculations based
upon this chart. So this is a chart of
the visual spectrum of light. We have the
frequencies of the visible spectrum in
TeraHertz. So if you take a single
oscillation of light and you measure the
distance that it travels, you get the
wavelength. For example, the 400 terahertz
frequency of light will have a single
oscillation of 750 nanometers. And the
energy of this 400 terahertz light will
be 1.65 electron volts. Now,
we haven't talked about electron volts
yet, but it is yet another way to
describe a Joule.
I think this way of describing the
photon energy became popular when the
experimentalists were testing the
photoelectric effect. Let's try a
calculation to see if we can learn
anything more about H. I'm going to type
in 2 electron volts, so this is the
energy of a photon of red light. 2
electron volts is equal to this many
Joules. It also matches with the 484
TeraHertz, and it also matches for the
620 nanometer wavelength for red light.
So what I want to know is the average
energy per oscillation for this many
Joules, which is equivalent to 2
electron volts. So we know that there's
484 trillion oscillations in this
frequency of red light. So I am going to
divide the total energy of this photon
by 484 trillion, and I'm going to put the
label of cycles here. So we have the
total photon energy in Joules. We have
484 trillion cycles.
So this should give us the
average Energy per Cycle or Joules per
Cycle. And we get this number... that number
is Planck's constant. 6.62
times ten to the negative 34. The
difference is we have the units of Joule
Second. This is the way that physics
describes this constant, but I've shown
we can look at it a different way.
Planck's constant as Joules per Cycle.
Now, we're going to look at H as having
the unit of a Joule per Oscillation
instead of Joule Second, and we got here
by using this equation. Remember, we
started with the photon energy of 2
electron volts, then converted it to
Joules. Seeing H as a Quantum of Energy
that happens per Electromagnetic
Oscillation changes a lot of physics! For
example, just by this definition the wave
and the particle are now combined. So
let's take another look at this from a
different angle.
We know that this is a one second
hard-coded equation that came from an
experiment, where the data was collected
at one-second intervals. So let's go
ahead and input into this equation all
of the one second time frames. We have
Planck's constant as a Joule. This second
is an artifact from the blackbody
radiation experiment. And then we'll put
one Electromagnetic Cycle occurring in
one second or 1 Hertz. Here's the 1
second. Here's the 1 Electromagnetic
Cycle. Now, we can cancel out the 1
seconds, but we're not going to destroy
this information. So after plugging in
everything that happens in one second
into this equation, we are left with
Planck's constant as Energy not as Joule
Second, and one electromagnetic cycle. In
other words, this is the Energy of an
Electromagnetic Cycle. Okay, so with H
being the Quantum of Energy, we can now
calculate that light has quantized mass
and momentum. Wow! So, this is interesting!
So we know that the measurement unit for
energy is a Joule, and for H, it's also a
Joule, but per oscillation. And if we look
at the Joule in terms of base units, we
get this. If you look up the base units,
you might see it in this form. All I'm
doing is writing it as Meters per Second
times Meters per Second. Now we can plug
back in the variables for these units. So
for Joule, it's E.
For the base unit kilogram, we have mass.
For the base unit of velocity, we plug in
C, which is the symbol for the speed of
light. And you combine this, and you get
the famous e = mc-squared,
without any complicated derivation. Now
since E and H are both the Joule, what we
can do is plug in H (but remember it's
per oscillation), and in this particular
case we're gonna make that oscillation
1 Hertz or one Oscillation per Second.
And we're going to calculate the mass,
because we know the value of H and we
know the value of C or the speed of
light. So we have H equals MC squared. We
need to isolate the M, so we're going to
divide both sides by C squared. Then we
end up with mass equaling this term... and
we can plug in the values here, and get
this value for the mass of a single
oscillation of light. And we can see the
calculation here. Planck's constant in
Joules, speed of light squared, and this
is the mass related to a single
oscillation of electromagnetic radiation.
This is the quantum of mass, so no mass
can be divided smaller than this. And
having mass associated to light is a big
deal, because now we can calculate the
momentum. Let's walk through this one. So
the symbol P is momentum. Momentum is a
mass times the velocity, and you can see
that right here.
So we're gonna isolate momentum in this
equation, and we divide both sides by C,
and now we can calculate this value. Here
we have Planck's constant in Joules over
the speed of light, and this is the
Quantum of Momentum. So in today's
science, the photon is considered a
massless particle. And the problem with
that concept is in order to have
momentum,
you need to have mass. Momentum is a mass
times a velocity. Now, I don't want to get
too far into Einsteinian relativity
here, but if you go study the problem of
the massless photon, it is actually a
paradox. That's because when you end up
with E = PC as the momentum of a
massless photon, P still requires a mass
by virtue of its definition. And if mass
is zero, then P is zero. But anyway, when
you see that H is Joule per Oscillation
or H is energy, then the math brings out
the mass that is related to a single
oscillation of light. The next topic is
the idea of a high-energy photon.
Currently in science, this exists, but in
the unified view of light, all
Electromagnetic frequencies have the
same energy per oscillation. So if you
talk about something like X-rays, those
are generally considered high-energy
photons,
whereas radio waves are low energy
photons.
So let's see how that happens using this
chart. We have the visible spectrum here.
And we'll take red light, which is 400
TeraHertz, and it has 1.65
electron volts of photon energy. Now, if
we go up here to violet light or near
ultraviolet light,
we have almost double the frequency. And
if you look at the energy, it's almost
doubled. So this higher frequency light
is considered a higher energy than this
lower frequency light. So why does it
work out this way?
We know that the photon energy is
calculated using this equation, but what
science is asking us to do in this
equation, is to throw away the idea of
time and space.
In other words, disregard the one second
that it takes to get these oscillations
and disregard the space that is occupied
by these wavelengths, in order to create
the energy. We know that nature does not
absorb and radiates energy in one second
time frames. So, this equation is being
turned into an instant energy
transformation. So the idea of high
energy photons exists, because when this
number, the frequency, increases so does
the energy associated to the frequency.
So just to relate this back to the
photoelectric effect, as you increase the
frequency of the light, the electrons on
the surface of the metal are ejected
faster and faster. This increasing photon
energy was used to explain that effect.
In other words the instantaneous
transformation
of this into energy, allows for the math
to kind of mimic what was going on in
the photoelectric experiment. In the
unified view of light, each wavelength or
each oscillation has the same H energy
associated to it. So the question might
be, "how do we get high-energy light with
this type of viewpoint?"  And the short
answer to that would be wave
constructive interference or wave
superposition. If you're measuring light
energy per second, as in frequency, then
you get exactly this per second.  Because
frequency increases oscillations per
second, or H energy per second. So if
you're following all this, you might
describe HV as a one-second ray of
light with the minimum amplitude created
by the Quantum of Energy. So how small is
a quantum of energy? I don't know if we
can really answer that, but we can give
it a shot. So here's a list that compares
the various energies in Joules. So if we
go to our macroscopic world, we can get
an idea from this. Imagine if we took a
cigarette lighter and heated up the
thermometer by one degree Celsius. And if
we go to ten to the 34 order of
magnitude, it's estimated that the
total output of the Sun for an entire
year. So if we think of the energy of
Planck's constant like a cigarette
lighter that's on for a couple of
seconds, then at our scale we would be
like our Sun burning for an entire year
in the solar system. I don't know how
accurate that is, but it
gives you an idea that the Quantum of
Energy is very, very, very small. So then
what is a photon? That's a really good
question. There are single photon sources
on the market and single photon
detectors. Now that we know the E equals HV
problem, and we know H as the Quantum of
Energy, then I think we can ask better
questions. Let's use green light as an
example at 500 nanometers. We can type in
"500 nanometer at the speed of light" and
we get one femtosecond per oscillation
of green light. And it looks like the
femtosecond is one quadrillion of a
second. We have some type of timing
control of laser pulses that will work
at the femtosecond and attosecond time
frames. And look this is crazy fast, and
realize that our gigahertz electronics
is down in this range... a billionth of a
second. So this laser technology must be
working almost twice as fast as our
fastest electronics. Looking at the
detector side, we can see that it's rated
for 15 Picoseconds. This is great
technology, but it doesn't seem fast
enough to be able to count individual
green oscillations. And then the last
part would be to figure out what is the
minimal amount of energy that can be
detected at that femto speed. And this
would be a very difficult question to
answer, because we don't have
specifications based on a per
oscillation basis. Basically what it goes
back to is... "what is a photon?" And given
the information about the Quantum Flaw,
the definition of a photon is still an
open question. Well, this video is getting
close to an hour now, so I'm going to
break this up into multiple parts. So for
the final slide of this video,
I'd like to acknowledge where I got my
information on the Quantum Flaw, and how
you can go learn more about this in
greater detail. I think we owe a debt of
gratitude to Dr. Juliana Mortensen for
putting together all of this information.
She first published the Quantum Flaw
information in 1999. So you have to
imagine in the 90s, to get access to a
lot of these old books, you were using
card catalogues, dewey decimal systems,
and trying to find books that probably
weren't even on the shelf anymore. If you
go to her website forgottenphysics.com,
she has published a lot of great
scientific information, and specifically
the earliest reference that I've found
on this issue. Let's take a quick look at
this paper. On page 11, you'll find the
first reference to the Quantum Flaw. In
fact, this whole video is pretty much
just a re-teaching of what she found over
20 years ago. Lori-Anne Gardi has also
published a lot of information on this
subject, and this information was very
instrumental for my own learning. You can
go to her YouTube channel and view
videos on this same subject that go into
greater detail. She has also published a
physics essay that fixes the problem in
mathematics that we discussed early in
this video. This essay also uses 
Planck's constant as the Quantum of
Energy, and then re-calibrates all of the
Planck derived units. And I'd like to
point out something in this paper that I
find very fascinating. One of the derived
Planck units is the lowest temperature
that we could ever achieve. In other
words the real absolute zero! By seeing H
as the Quantum of Energy instead of the
Quantum of Action, she has found that we
cannot go below this temperature, because
that would correspond to an energy that
is less
than the Quantum of Energy...H. I think if
the cold temperature physicists would
know this, then the cold atom laboratory
that we have in the International Space
Station would probably be trying to hit
this temperature. This would
experimentally prove that, if we cannot
go below this temperature, then H is in
fact the Quantum of Energy. We would
effectively be reaching the bottom of
our universe. Then it would be a very
hard argument to say that H is just some
kind of a mathematical trick. Well, I hope
this gives you an awareness of the
Quantum Flaw and in the next video, we
will look at how this applies to the
rest of Quantum Physics.
