Physics' constants matching: h = k.q.c

[martillo]

There's a match in the physics' constants: h = k.q.c

Does anybody knows the reason?

h = 6,62 x10^-34 J/s

k = 1,38x10^-23 J/K

q = 1,60x10^-19 C

c = 3,00x10^8 m/s

These are the values with precision of two digits but the matching seems valid for any quantity of digits.

Nothing appears in a google search...

Edited November 18, 2022 by martillo

[swansont]

16 minutes ago, martillo said:

There's a match in the physics' constants: h = k.q.c

Does anybody knows the reason?

h = 6,62 x10^-34

k = 1,38x10^-23

q = 1,60x10^-19

c = 3,00x10^8

These are the values with precision of two digits but the matching seems valid for any quantity of digits.

Nothing appears in a google search...

You forgot to include the units. 

[martillo]

4 minutes ago, swansont said:

You forgot to include the units. 

Right, I edited that now. Thanks.

[swansont]

3 minutes ago, martillo said:

Right, I edited that now. Thanks.

OK, does h have the same units as kqc?

Are they numerically the same if you use cgs units?

[martillo]

11 minutes ago, swansont said:

OK, does h have the same units as kqc?

I think it should but the matching relates Joules, Coulombs, Kelvin graus, meter and seconds. I don't know how to check that.

11 minutes ago, swansont said:

Are they numerically the same if you use cgs units?

I think not.

Edited November 18, 2022 by martillo

[swansont]

3 hours ago, martillo said:

I think it should but the matching relates Joules, Coulombs, Kelvin graus, meter and seconds. I don't know how to check that.

 

h=? kqc

J-s (not J/s) =? J/K * Coul * m/s

J cancels. Nothing else does. They are not equal

 

3 hours ago, martillo said:

I think not.

They can’t be equal if it depends on the unit system. 

[studiot]

5 hours ago, martillo said:

q = 1,60x10^-19 C

I think you have this one incorrect.

 

1.6 x 10^-19 Joules is the energy of one electron volt (ev)

[Sensei]

1 hour ago, studiot said:

6 hours ago, martillo said:

q = 1,60x10^-19 C

I think you have this one incorrect.

1.6 x 10^-19 Joules is the energy of one electron volt (ev)

1,6 in some countries mean 1.6 in English.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_separator

Q = e = 1.6021766x10^-19 C is perfectly fine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_charge

Edited November 18, 2022 by Sensei

[martillo]

1 hour ago, studiot said:

I think you have this one incorrect.

 

1.6 x 10^-19 Joules is the energy of one electron volt (ev)

q = 1.6x10^-19 C (Coulombs) is the charge of the electron and yes, 1,6x10^-19 J (Joules) is the energy of one electron-volt.

11 minutes ago, Sensei said:

1,6 in some countries mean 1.6 in English.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_separator

Q = e = 1.6021766x10^-19 C is perfectly fine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_charge

I'm sorry, I have an Spanish table of the constants. I apologize if this brings troubles. I'll write the point in the future.

[Sensei]

2 minutes ago, martillo said:

q = 1.6x10^-19 C (Coulombs) is the charge of the electron

Electron has charge Q = -1e = -1.6021766x10^-19 C

 

3 minutes ago, martillo said:

I'm sorry, I have an Spanish table of the constants. I apologize if this brings troubles. I'll write the point in the future.

For me, there is no problem. When talking to a non-English speaker, we have to take this into account.

[martillo]

3 hours ago, swansont said:

 

h=? kqc

J-s (not J/s) =? J/K * Coul * m/s

J cancels. Nothing else does. They are not equal

 

They can’t be equal if it depends on the unit system. 

I'm still thinking about the subject. I think I have found a possible interesting relation. Seems the relation holds in other systems of units but I'm not sure yet. Working on that...

34 minutes ago, Sensei said:

Electron has charge Q = -1e = -1.6021766x10^-19 C

You are right, an electron has a negative charge. I think the relation takes into account just the positive values. It could be the charge of the positron then. I'm not sure, is not clear for me. That's why I'm asking here in the forum for a possible explanation of the relation.

3 hours ago, swansont said:

They can’t be equal if it depends on the unit system. 

Looking in the table of the constants in the cgs system of units the relation h = kqc does not hold numerically but it could be because of a lack of some constant for conversion needed.

3 hours ago, swansont said:

h=? kqc

J-s (not J/s) =? J/K * Coul * m/s

J cancels. Nothing else does. They are not equal

The relation has a numerical exact match within the mks system of units. It should mean something...

Edited November 18, 2022 by martillo

[swansont]

2 hours ago, martillo said:

The relation has a numerical exact match within the mks system of units. It should mean something...

No, unless you have an exact match (like why the fundamental charge and the conversion of eV to Joules are the same number - because they have a common basis) then it’s accidental.

You could take combinations of other constants and scale them to get a custom unit system and have an equality. The choice of the value of a meter and the second are arbitrary. There’s nothing special about most mks/SI units

[studiot]

4 hours ago, martillo said:

q = 1.6x10^-19 C (Coulombs) is the charge of the electron and yes, 1,6x10^-19 J (Joules) is the energy of one electron-volt.

So what is a coulomb ?

It is not a fundamental unit.

 

I also think your "equation" h=? kqc is suspiciously like the second black body radiation constant = hc/k, measured in degrees of temperature.

This might also help you sort out.

the SI system is French and published jointly in French and English. Sorry i do not have a Spanish trnaslation, here is the beginning of the English version.

 

The SI system is based on 7 fundamental physical properties and 7 base constants to quantify everything.

The system does not include the Coulomb as a base number.

The base constants are
 

•  
• the caesium hyperfine frequency ΔνCs
•  
• the speed of light in vacuum c
•  
• the Planck constant h
•  
• the elementary charge e
•  
• the Boltzmann constant k
•  
• the Avogadro constant NA, and
•  
• the luminous efficacy of a defined visible radiation Kcd

Here is an English language version (SI is French) of the definitions.
 

Defining constants - BIPM

 

 www.bipm.org

[martillo]

10 hours ago, studiot said:

So what is a coulomb ?

It is not a fundamental unit.

Do you mean that the unit for charge can be changed?

It could be a not fundamental unit but if you change the unit of charge the known Electric Force equation F = Kq₁q₂/r² would change needing a constant different from K. Would this bring some problem or actually not? I'm just asking, I don't know the total consequence of a change in the unit of charge in Physics.

 

 

[studiot]

Don't ask me. read the official SI definition for yourself direct from the horse's mouth.

I have given you the link.

 

Then we can have a proper discussion about the Coulomb, which was defined nearly 100 years before the electron was discovered and longer before the electron charge was measured.

The electron or proton charge is fundamental as Sensei has mentioned, the Coulomb turns out to be a multiple of this, the multiplier being another fundamental constant.

So no, it has not changed.

[martillo]

21 hours ago, swansont said:

h=? kqc

J-s (not J/s) =? J/K * Coul * m/s

J cancels. Nothing else does. They are not equal

You are right. The unities of the left side does not match with those of the right side. They are different things. It is just a coincidence that they present the same numerical value within the mks system of unities.

Thanks.