From martin.rocek@gmail.com Fri May 8 13:40:40 2015
Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 13:40:32 -0400
From: Martin Rocek
To: Tony Phillips
Subject: Re: Formula on the wall
Well, you had a lot to worry about. But Christian says it is not too much of a problem if you
want to correct. Otherwise, it is like the proverbial deliberate error in a Persian carpet.
Martin
On May 8, 2015, at 1:18 PM, Tony Phillips wrote:
> I think this was my mistake originally. :( Tony
>
> On Fri, 8 May 2015, Martin Rocek wrote:
>
>> Dear Tony,
>>
>> I wrote to you about this 3 years ago, but for some reason, the correction was never made.
>> The Aharanov-Bohm phase is not normalized correctly. The integral should be (hbar) \Phi,
>> not (1/2 pi) \Phi. Christian told me he could correct that--particularly if we wrote it (h/2 pi) \Phi.
>> In natural units, one always uses hbar=1, not h=1. So correct alternatives are:
>>
>> \Phi
>> (hbar) \Phi
>> (h/2 pi) \Phi
>>
>> but the current
>>
>> (1/2 pi) \Phi
>>
>> is not right.
>>
>>
>> Best,
>> Martin
>>
>> p.s. I've copied George and Fred on this so they can chime in if they like.
>>
>>
>>
From cswhiteartist@optonline.net Fri May 8 14:01:12 2015
Date: Fri, 08 May 2015 14:01:21 -0400
From: Christian White
To: Tony Phillips
Subject: Re: Formula on the wall
It’s OK, Tony. I talked to him. He says if I change the 1 to an h it will be accurate. I can do that easily. I will have to charge for it, though!
> On May 8, 2015, at 1:18 PM, Tony Phillips wrote:
>
> I think this was my mistake originally. :( Tony
>
> On Fri, 8 May 2015, Martin Rocek wrote:
>
>> Dear Tony,
>>
>> I wrote to you about this 3 years ago, but for some reason, the correction was never made.
>> The Aharanov-Bohm phase is not normalized correctly. The integral should be (hbar) \Phi,
>> not (1/2 pi) \Phi. Christian told me he could correct that--particularly if we wrote it (h/2 pi) \Phi.
>> In natural units, one always uses hbar=1, not h=1. So correct alternatives are:
>>
>> \Phi
>> (hbar) \Phi
>> (h/2 pi) \Phi
>>
>> but the current
>>
>> (1/2 pi) \Phi
>>
>> is not right.
>>
>>
>> Best,
>> Martin
>>
>> p.s. I've copied George and Fred on this so they can chime in if they like.
>>
>>
>>
From cswhiteartist@optonline.net Sat May 9 01:36:16 2015
Date: Sat, 09 May 2015 01:36:26 -0400
From: Christian White
To: Tony Phillips
Subject: Re: Formula on the wall
I w will have to think about that for a moment. Unfortunately, another physicist, I think it was Fred Goldhaber, tonight told me that absolutely no, changing the one to an h would still be completely wrong, the whole fraction must be taken out, so, I would have to know exactly what needs to be done, because those two different operation would cost radically different amounts.
> On May 8, 2015, at 3:22 PM, Tony Phillips wrote:
>
> How much?
>
> On Fri, 8 May 2015, Christian White wrote:
>
>> It’s OK, Tony. I talked to him. He says if I change the 1 to an h it will be accurate. I can do that easily. I will have to charge for it, though!
>>> On May 8, 2015, at 1:18 PM, Tony Phillips wrote:
>>>
>>> I think this was my mistake originally. :( Tony
>>>
>>> On Fri, 8 May 2015, Martin Rocek wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear Tony,
>>>>
>>>> I wrote to you about this 3 years ago, but for some reason, the correction was never made.
>>>> The Aharanov-Bohm phase is not normalized correctly. The integral should be (hbar) \Phi,
>>>> not (1/2 pi) \Phi. Christian told me he could correct that--particularly if we wrote it (h/2 pi) \Phi.
>>>> In natural units, one always uses hbar=1, not h=1. So correct alternatives are:
>>>>
>>>> \Phi
>>>> (hbar) \Phi
>>>> (h/2 pi) \Phi
>>>>
>>>> but the current
>>>>
>>>> (1/2 pi) \Phi
>>>>
>>>> is not right.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>> p.s. I've copied George and Fred on this so they can chime in if they like.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
From martin.rocek@gmail.com Fri May 8 16:48:20 2015
Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 16:47:03 -0400
From: Martin Rocek
To: Tony Phillips
Subject: Re: Formula on the wall
Hi Tony,
Fred pointed out that I got confused as well--the only correct version is with no
planck's constant and no 2pi, just plain \Phi. \Phi is the flux--the phase shift of the wave-function
delta = (q/hbar) \Phi, where q is the charge.
Martin
On May 8, 2015, at 1:40 PM, Martin Rocek wrote:
> Well, you had a lot to worry about. But Christian says it is not too much of a problem if you
> want to correct. Otherwise, it is like the proverbial deliberate error in a Persian carpet.
>
> Martin
>
> On May 8, 2015, at 1:18 PM, Tony Phillips wrote:
>
>> I think this was my mistake originally. :( Tony
>>
>> On Fri, 8 May 2015, Martin Rocek wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Tony,
>>>
>>> I wrote to you about this 3 years ago, but for some reason, the correction was never made.
>>> The Aharanov-Bohm phase is not normalized correctly. The integral should be (hbar) \Phi,
>>> not (1/2 pi) \Phi. Christian told me he could correct that--particularly if we wrote it (h/2 pi) \Phi.
>>> In natural units, one always uses hbar=1, not h=1. So correct alternatives are:
>>>
>>> \Phi
>>> (hbar) \Phi
>>> (h/2 pi) \Phi
>>>
>>> but the current
>>>
>>> (1/2 pi) \Phi
>>>
>>> is not right.
>>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Martin
>>>
>>> p.s. I've copied George and Fred on this so they can chime in if they like.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>