There was quite a bit of debate over the derivation of Planck's constant by Nehru and Satz (see PDF archive) and I was asked some questions in regards to what, exactly, IS Planck's constant, in the RS?
We, as material-sector humans, best understand things in terms of spatial relationships, what Larson calls "speed", s/t (or powers, thereof, like acceleration, s/t2). When confronted with energy relations, t/s, which are cosmic-sector based, there is nothing directly observable as it's all invisible energy and forces, that change things like magic.
An easy way to understand energy concepts is to just yank them through the looking glass, and convert them into spatial relationships, to gain a conceptual understanding in a familiar frame of reference.
Something to keep in mind is that the material and cosmic sectors are mathematical conjugates of each other. When you deal with the interaction between the two, you have to use conjugates, such that, for example, material acceleration s/t2 is conjugated to cosmic acceleration, t/s2 -- not it's reciprocal, t2/s. But, if you want to look at a cosmic relationship in material terms, you take the reciprocal, because all you are doing is moving your perspective to the other side of the mirror--the exponential relationships remain intact.
With that in mind, take the reciprocal of E = hf, in Larson's natural units, to see what it would do in space:
E (t/s) = h (t2/s) f (1/t)
All one needs to do, is invert the ratios:
s/t = s/t2 t/1
Now, we just need to identify these ratios in terms of conventional, spatial concepts:
s/t = velocity, v
s/t2 = acceleration, a
t/1 = time, t
If this Planck equation were expressed in terms of conventional speed relations, it just says: v = at, a very common relation to calculate the velocity of an object, given an acceleration and time.
The acceleration corresponds with h, Planck's constant, so Planck's constant is, conceptually, just acceleration--but its effect is in time, rather than space.
E = hf
E = hf
Every dogma has its day...