Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
freem
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Openai/6897769e-4ee4-800f-aba5-69cca34f701c
(section)
Add languages
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
===== 1. Two different origins of two similar numbers. - The golden angle (~137.5077°) is a pure geometric number coming from the Golden Ratio (φ) — a structureless, scale-free geometry result. - The inverse fine-structure constant (≈137.035999…) is a measured electromagnetic coupling built from physical constants e2/(4πε0ℏc)e^2/(4\pi\varepsilon_0 \hbar c)e2/(4πε0ℏc). it is the result of physical interactions, not a purely abstract geometry. ===== # The key idea: take the ideal geometric angle as the base geometry, then let real electromagnetic physics (dispersion, finite wavelength, Planck spectral weighting, boundary effects at a spherical surface) shift that ideal angle slightly. The shift is small (∼0.34% relative), so a spectral/dispersion correction is a plausible candidate. # Why a spectrum would produce a systematic offset. - Spherical optical processes (e.g., scattering/refraction by raindrops, or EM interactions with a 2-D spherical boundary) produce wavelength-dependent scattering angles: θ=θ(λ)\theta=\theta(\lambda)θ=θ(λ). - The physical system doesn’t pick one wavelength — it samples a spectrum (thermal photons, atomic emission lines, etc.). The effective angle you would attach to the process is a spectrally weighted average θeff=∫θ(λ) B(λ,T) dλ∫B(λ,T) dλ,\theta_{\rm eff} = \frac{\int \theta(\lambda)\, B(\lambda,T)\,d\lambda}{\int B(\lambda,T)\,d\lambda},θeff=∫B(λ,T)dλ∫θ(λ)B(λ,T)dλ, where B(λ,T)B(\lambda,T)B(λ,T) is the spectral radiance (Planck law) or whatever spectral weighting is correct for your source. - If θ(λ)\theta(\lambda)θ(λ) differs slightly from the geometric value (because the refractive index, phase shifts, boundary conditions, etc. vary with λ\lambdaλ) then θeff\theta_{\rm eff}θeff will differ from the pure geometric angle by a small amount Δθ\Delta\thetaΔθ. # Numbers look plausible. - The observed offset is Δθ≈0.4718∘\Delta\theta\approx 0.4718^\circΔθ≈0.4718∘, a relative change ~0.34%. Typical visible-range material dispersion or effective refractive-index shifts across a thermal spectrum can produce sub-percent corrections to scattering angles (geometric-optics rainbow angles change by degrees across the visible spectrum). - So qualitatively: geometry (golden angle) + wavelength-dependent physics (dispersion, Planck weighting, boundary phase shifts from the 2-D electron sphere) → a small, systematic spectral correction that could account for the 0.47°.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to freem are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (see
Freem:Copyrights
for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource.
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)