> However, it looks to me as if they are calculating the value of 1.36e-15 > as the effective proton radius, using Planck's Constant. > > http://tinyurl.com/345cnr9 > > If anyone wants to help me read it, scroll down to "Microscopic analysis > of nucleus-nucleus elastic scattering at intermediate energies", and > open the PDF. Search for 1.36. > > So this means that Planck's Constant can't be derived from Vt if Vt was > derived from Planck's Constant.
I need to backtrack. I was referencing the document that Znidarsic uses to determine spacing in the nucleus, but actually reading something else, again with the same 1.36e-15 value, where it was calculated using Planck's Constant. So the value that Frank is referencing does not appear to be derived from Planck's Constant. Sorry for the confusion. Jones Beene brings up a good point. Why would a compressional wave, calculated to work between nucleons in a nucleus, work in a single proton hydrogen atom? Then again why does Vt allow us to compute values without Planck's Constant? Just a coincidence? Craig
