Sorry for being rude, I fully understand now. When I visualized i thought of a square with .5cm sides and then a square that is 1cm^2. When I visualized putting the square in the .5 by .5 I realized the area only took up 1/4 of the square.
I understand that I didn't use the correct way to show measurements, but that still doesn't help my question. Your answer is the equivalent of me asking "Are there things that shouldn't be an adverb." and you respond with "You forgot an apostrophe in 'shouldn't'."
I came across something that is completely counter-intuitive, and I'm wondering if I'm correct or not. If a square has a side that is .8m someone would do .8 time .8 which is .64. How can an area be smaller than a side I thought and so I looked it up and found only one site that said something...
So I grabbed Plancks constant for joules(6.626070040(81)×10^−34) and multiplied it by the frequency(6.8×10^15) using the google calculator it came out at 3.6496394e-16. Also, thanks for the info on nanometers.
I adopted the frequency from "http://www.csun.edu/~jte35633/worksheets/Chemistry/5-2PlancksEq.pdf" and then attempted to use the formula available on that site. The probable reason for why I got my E would likely be because of my novice in this subject. Also, could you explain to me how I could...
The numbers don't have 7 decimal spots, they have 24, they're shortened. For example, 1.2173887*10^-24 is equal to 0.000000000000000012173887. The whole thing's a decimal.
Basically, I found the energy of a photon using its frequency ((6.8*10^15) and E=(3.6496394*10^-16)) and so I then used "p=E/c" to find the momentum and got 1.2173887*10^-24 however I don't know the measurement of the momentum. Is there a better equation to use to find momentum, and what would...