h vs. ħ?
Moderators: Chem_Mod, Chem_Admin
-
- Posts: 113
- Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:54 pm
- Been upvoted: 1 time
h vs. ħ?
Can you explain the difference between h (6.62607015×10−34) and ħ (h-bar) (1.054571817×10−34) to me please?
And when do we use the 1) formula and the 2) formula?
1) ∆p ∆x ≥ h/4π
2) ∆p ∆x = (1/2) ħ
Thank youuuuu
And when do we use the 1) formula and the 2) formula?
1) ∆p ∆x ≥ h/4π
2) ∆p ∆x = (1/2) ħ
Thank youuuuu
-
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:59 pm
Re: h vs. ħ?
I think the h-bar symbol represents h/2pi, so (½)h-bar would be equal to h/4pi. Since both equations are basically equivalent to each other, I’m pretty sure you can use whichever form you’re most comfortable with. Hope this helps!
-
- Posts: 100
- Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:40 pm
- Been upvoted: 1 time
Re: h vs. ħ?
h is Planck's constant, which is defined as 6.626x10^-34 J s. ħ is equivalent to Planck's constant(h)/2pi. I'm assuming the second formula should have a ≥ instead of an = sign but the formulas should represent the same thing, just in different notations.
The textbook also explains this in section 1B.3 The Uncertainty Principle.
The textbook also explains this in section 1B.3 The Uncertainty Principle.
-
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:39 pm
Re: h vs. ħ?
ħ is just some chemistry technical term/jargon for h/2π. Thus when its (1/2)*ħ it equals the h/4π in the other equation. Also the equations should both have a greater than or equal to sign, so I don't know why there is a discrepancy there.
-
- Posts: 114
- Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 10:01 pm
- Been upvoted: 1 time
Re: h vs. ħ?
ħ is not h/4pi!!! It is h/2pi. 4pi was only in the equation used for the midterm because there was a 2 in the denominator to multiply!
-
- Posts: 110
- Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 10:03 pm
Re: h vs. ħ?
The h-bar symbol represents 2pi! I would ultimately just follow the formula sheet to keep it a familiar representation of the equation.
-
- Posts: 115
- Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:51 pm
Re: h vs. ħ?
h-bar is h/2pi. You can use either equation, but personally, I prefer just remembering h and using ∆p ∆x ≥ h/4π.
-
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:38 pm
Re: h vs. ħ?
Is h-bar used in any other circumstances, or is the indeterminacy equation the only one that uses this?
-
- Posts: 107
- Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 10:00 pm
Re: h vs. ħ?
I prefer using the equation with just h, as that's what Lavelle teaches, but the textbook uses the other just to symbolize h/2pi.. they're the same thing/interchangeable.
-
- Posts: 149
- Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:54 pm
Re: h vs. ħ?
Hi! h is planck's constant, and h bar is a reduced value of h. 1/2h/2pi is the same thing as h/4pi, they equal the same value. The equations should both have a greater than or equal sign, but equal is the most optimistic value. I hope this helps!
Re: h vs. ħ?
I understand that h bar is the same set up as h/4pi. But why do we have a complicated/different set up of the equation. Is there something it was derived from?
Re: h vs. ħ?
ħ, or h bar is simply h/2pi. h as you know is plancks constant. h bar exists just to save space. So (1/2)ħ is the same as h/4pi.
Return to “Heisenberg Indeterminacy (Uncertainty) Equation”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests