Simple Nature - Light and Matter

that could make one have any effect on the other. (3) These cannot be independent, since dying
today guarantees that you won’t die tomorrow.
Page 862:
The area under the curve from 130 to 135 cm is about 3/4 of a rectangle. The area from 135
to 140 cm is about 1.5 rectangles. The number of people in the second range is about twice as
much. We could have converted these to actual probabilities (1 rectangle = 5 cm×0.005 cm−^1
= 0.025), but that would have been pointless because we were just going to compare the two
areas.
Page 867:
On the left-hand side, dNis a unitless count, and dtis an infinitesimal amount of time, with
units of seconds, so the units are s−^1 as claimed. On the right, bothN(0) and the exponential
factor are unitless, so the only units come from the factor of 1/τ, which again has units of s−^1.
Page 875:
The axes of the graph are frequency and photon energy, so its slope is Planck’s constant. It
doesn’t matter if you graphe∆V rather than W+e∆V, because that only changes the y-
intercept, not the slope.
Page 893:
Wavelength is inversely proportional to momentum, so to produce a large wavelength we would
need to use electrons with very small momenta and energies. (In practical terms, this isn’t very
easy to do, since ripping an electron out of an object is a violent process, and it’s not so easy
to calm the electrons down afterward.)
Page 902:
Under the ordinary circumstances of life, the accuracy with which we can measure position and
momentum of an object doesn’t result in a value of ∆p∆xthat is anywhere near the tiny order
of magnitude of Planck’s constant. We run up against the ordinary limitations on the accuracy
of our measuring techniques long before the uncertainty principle becomes an issue.
Page 905:
No. The equationKE=p^2 / 2 mis nonrelativistic, so it can’t be applied to an electron moving
at relativistic speeds. Photons always move at relativistic speeds, so it can’t be applied to them,
either.
Page 907:
Dividing by Planck’s constant, a small number, gives a large negative result inside the exponen-
tial, so the probability will be very small.
Page 920:
If you trace a circle going around the center, you run into a series of eight complete wavelengths.
Its angular momentum is 8~.
Page 926:
n= 3,= 0,z= 0: one state;n= 3,= 1,z=−1, 0, or 1: three states;n= 3,= 2, z=−2,−1, 0, 1, or 2: five states
Page 932:
The original argument was that a kink would have a zero wavelength, which would correspond
to an infinite momentum and an infinite kinetic energy, and that would violate conservation of
energy. But the kink in this example occurs atr= 0, which is right on top of the proton, where
the electrical energy−ke^2 /ris infinite andnegative. Since the electrical energy is negative and