This may not be true. The table of data from the previous post shows that if \(n=2\) for all values of \(\lambda\)
n | \(\lambda\) (nm) | \(\cfrac { n\lambda }{ 2\pi }\) | \(n^{ 2 }ln(\cfrac { 2\pi }{ n\lambda \times10^{-9} } )\) | \(\cfrac { \lambda }{ 2\pi }\) (nm) |
---|---|---|---|---|
2 | 121.567 | 38.697 | 68.270 | 19.349 |
2 | 102.573 | 32.651 | 68.950 | 16.325449626 |
2 | 97.254 | 30.958 | 69.163 | 15.478927264 |
2 | 94.974 | 30.232 | 69.257 | 15.1160592074 |
2 | 93.780 | 29.852 | 69.308 | 14.9260066847 |
2 | 93.075 | 29.628 | 69.338 | 14.8137991405 |
2 | 92.623 | 29.484 | 69.358 | 14.7418271526 |
2 | 92.315 | 29.386 | 69.371 | 14.6928378163 |
2 | 92.097 | 29.316 | 69.380 | 14.6581250995 |
2 | 91.935 | 29.265 | 69.387 | 14.6323571542 |
2 | 91.935 | 29.265 | 69.387 | 14.6323253223 |
2 | 91.813 | 29.226 | 69.393 | 14.6128441827 |
\(n^{ 2 }ln(\cfrac { 2\pi }{ n\lambda \times10^{-9} } )\) varies only in the second last decimal place. As shown in the last column, \(\cfrac { \lambda }{ 2\pi }\) is almost a constant. This suggests that we have a fixed perimeter of \(2\pi x\) onto which different \(\lambda\)s are packed.
As such,
\(2\pi x=n\lambda=n\cfrac{c}{f}\)
\(f=n\cfrac{c}{2\pi x}\) when \(x=a_\psi\)
\(f=n\cfrac{c}{2\pi a_\psi}\)
Obviously \(f=0\) and \(n=0\) is a valid data point,
n | \(f\) |
---|---|
0 | 0 |
1 | 2466067.5 |
2 | 2922728.6 |
2 | 3082568.8 |
2 | 3156567.3 |
2 | 3196759.8 |
2 | 3220973.8 |
2 | 3236699.1 |
2 | 3247491.0 |
2 | 3260914.0 |
2 | 3260921.1 |
2 | 3265268.4 |
A plot with the regression line is shown below.
The line above is defined by two points and one theoretical point. Given the gradient of the line,
\(\cfrac{c}{2\pi a_\psi}=1438393.5\)
\(a_\psi=\cfrac{299792458}{2\pi \times1438393.5}=33.2\) nm
From which we have no choice but to admit the existence of a half wave, where \(n=\cfrac{1}{2}\)
\(x=\cfrac{1}{2}\cfrac{\lambda}{2\pi }\)
And that the lowest frequency point is due to this standing wave half a wave length, and the next series of points are due to the standing wave of one wave length. From this,
\(a_{\psi\,\frac{1}{2}}=\cfrac{299792458}{2\pi \times2876787.0}=16.6\) nm
With this as a guide we can repeated the analysis in the post "Radius Of An Electron" for better results.
\(a_{\psi\,\frac{1}{2}}=\cfrac{299792458}{2\pi \times2876787.0}=16.6\) nm
With this as a guide we can repeated the analysis in the post "Radius Of An Electron" for better results.