Proposal to Include Planck Implied Values in the CODATA Listing

After having analyzed different interrelationships among the CODATA fundamental physical constants, it has become apparent that certain numerical values must be included in the CODATA recommended values.
The main thrust of my analysis to date has been in relation to the Planck constants of mass, energy, temperature, length and time. In a previous analysis, I have illustrated how one may derive Planck implied values, that is, numerical values as of the Planck constants. The manner in which the Planck implied values are generated is by multiplying each Planck constant times the elementary charge [1.602176487].
If one reverses this procedure, and then divides the Planck implied numbers by the elementary charge, then one would realize that Planck mass, energy, temperature, length and time are actually reduced numerical values, as they have been divided by the elementary charge. For, I shall not concern myself with this discussion and simply accept the Planck implied numerical values as that, values that are implied from the computations in the manner shown. ... more

Tweet

The Compton Wavelength Represents
the Fractal Reciprocal of the
Planck Implied Length

In this brief commentary, I illustrate that the Compton wavelength is a reciprocal fractal expression of the Planck implied length value. I also show why the Planck implied time is significant in relation to the natural unit of length as given by the CODATA, which represents a case in favor of its inclusion in the CODATA listing.
The constant of Planck time [5.39124] is derived as the Planck implied time [8.637717964] divided by the elementary charge [1.602176487],
The Planck implied time constant, 8.637717964, then, is a modified derivative of the 864 expression by way of Planck time [5.39124] and the elementary charge [1.602176487].
5.39124 times 1.602176487 equals 8.637717964... more

Tweet

Daniel Manrique and Mexican Art

22 de agosto de 2010 Hoy, México perdió uno de sus más grandes artistas y humanistas. Daniel Manrique Tepito Arte Acá.
El Ñero en la cultura.
"El arte, es lo único que nos hace humanos." -Daniel Manrique

The Snowflake: A Critical Commentary on Chaos Theory and Fractal Geometry

Scientific Notation,
Fractal Numbers and the Symbolic Formulae Based on Roots
(Two Possible Answers for Some Planck Constants)

Various physicists have asked me to place the scientific notation indicating the decimal places in the analyses. I find this not only unnecessary but counter to the reasoning.  In fact, because over the decades scientists have employed the scientific notation of fractal numerical values together with the indication of decimal placement, I consider that a possible reason why they have not detected faulty reasoning in the computations of the symbolic formulae of the fundamental physical constants that contain root expressions.... more...

Tweet

The original table listed on www.wikipedia.com compares eight different temperature scales. The diverse numerical values for these entries are mind-boggling. There are many different negative values on the eight distinct scales cited. For example:

What a headache reading all of these values produces. By adjusting the freezing point of water to 100.0 basic em units as on the Earth/matriX Temperature Scale I, the boiling point for water obtains at 136.6040 as shown above. The Earth/matriX temperature scale immediately tells us how much hotter is a temperature on the scale than that of the freezing point of water. For example, the boiling point of water is 1.366040 times hotter than the freezing point of water. The Sun’s surface temperature, then is 21.23375 times hotter than the cited freezing point of water. And so on, for each of the temperatures listed on the Earth/matriX temperature scale.
Whereas on the Kelvin scale, for example, one would have to divide the Sun’s temperature by the freezing point of water in order to know that answer: 5800 / 273.15 = 21.23375.
It is beyond me why physicists and chemists have not long ago decided to employ the obvious temperature scale of either choosing the freezing point or water or the boiling point of water as unit 100.0, as I have done with the Earth/matriX thermodynamic temperature scales. The fact that one knows immediately through the numerical values on these scales what are the comparative multiples of a particular reading in relation to either the freezing or boiling points represents an enormous analytical advantage over the other historically conventional scales.
The problem with the Kelvin scale is that its creator was unable to break away from the centigrade scale as employed and reflected in the Celsius scales. The significant gradation on the temperature scale based on the freezing/boiling points of water is not the 100-gradations, but rather the 0.36604 (or, 0.3661) ratio difference between those two points.
From the previous comparison of the Kelvin/Celsius scales and the Earth/matriX scale, the usefulness of knowing immediately the proportional relationships between the gradation readings becomes outstanding. Once the readings are made, there is no need for further computations as pointed out earlier regarding the Kelvin scale. The multiple times factor of a particular temperature reading on the Earth/matriX scale is inherent to the numerical value itself given for a specific event.
The same holds for the Earth/matriX temperature scale II, where the boiling point of water is designated as unit 100.0 and the freezing point appears as 0.732. For further analyses in this regard, consult additional published works on the different Earth/matriX temperature scales: www.earthmatrix.com

The Companion Numbers: The Ball Game

THE TEMPLE OF QUETZALCOATL





The 9 baktuns of the 9.0.0.0.0
Baseline of maya History on
the Aztec Calendar

The Extension of the Pythagorean Theorem

click