- #1

FZ+

- 1,599

- 3

Such a limit would certainly have interesting implications...

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter FZ+
- Start date

- #1

FZ+

- 1,599

- 3

Such a limit would certainly have interesting implications...

- #2

[edit]

Ok, I just saw the part about non-zero. Maybe someone would like to explain the details of my post for me?

- #3

- #4

FZ+

- 1,599

- 3

- #5

Brad_Ad23

- 502

- 1

You would be correct climbhi.

Quantum claustrophobia is what it is referred to.

Quantum claustrophobia is what it is referred to.

- #6

I wish I could remember what someone who thought he knew told me about zero speed. I don't know if everything just ceases to be, implodes, or what the heck. I think the gist of it was that movement was essential. That’s really all I can throw into the arena.Originally posted by FZ+

Could it be something like absolute zero where you can't actually get there except through extrapolation?

- #7

Originally posted by FZ+

Is this in reference to my post showing you couldn't have zero speed with Heisenberg? If so sorry, I thought it was valid (apparantely Brad does too...) Am I mistaking what you're referring to?

- #8

Michael F. Dmitriyev

- 342

- 1

It is possible to speak of minimum speed relatively a zero point only. That you offer to take as zero point?Originally posted by FZ+

I wonder, since c presents a maximum speed limit to the universe, is it plausible for there to be a theoretical minimum (and non-zero) speed limit too?

Such a limit would certainly have interesting implications...

- #9

Originally posted by climbhi

Well, you're not wrong per se... but I believe that the Δp you have shown refers to the variance (or might say the standard deviation... the square root of the variance) of the expectation <p> (ie <p

Actually in solid state physics, people are often concerned with calculating phonon modes in low dimensional systems.

There is a

eNtRopY

- #10

ObsessiveMathsFreak

- 406

- 8

seriously though...

I don't think such a speed could be said to exist.

remember all objects must be at rest with respect to themselves. All other speeds are relative. So zero speed is possible.

- #11

- #12

Originally posted by eNtRopY

Well, you're not wrong per se... but I believe that the Δp you have shown refers to the variance (or might say the standard deviation... the square root of the variance) of the expectation <p> (ie <p^{2}> - <p>^{2}). So, I believe the correct way to interpret this result is to say that the velocity of an object is centered around a certain value with an uncertainty given by this deviation. In that sense, the probability of measuring the velocity of a rest object at exactly zero is more probable than measuring it at any other value... but this probability is still zero.

Actually in solid state physics, people are often concerned with calculating phonon modes in low dimensional systems.

Side Bar:For those of you not in the know... a phonon mode in an array of atoms is analogous to the vibration found in a matrix of balls with each ball attached to its nearest neighbors by springs.

There is alowestenergy value a system can have... due to your reasoning. It is referred to as thezero point energy.

eNtRopY

I would like to further elaborate and say that you have a zero probability of finding any object at any exact speed due to the argument originally posted by climbhi.

eNtRopY

- #13

I'm pretty sure that 1/c is not it if there was a lowest speed. Afterall think of how fast your toe nails grow, prolly pretty close to 1/cOriginally posted by ObsessiveMathsFreak

seriously though...

I don't think such a speed could be said to exist.

remember all objects must be at rest with respect to themselves. All other speeds are relative. So zero speed is possible.

- #14

- #15

Michael F. Dmitriyev

- 342

- 1

Certainly, I am saying about the speed of light "c".

- #16

STAii

- 333

- 1

I personally do not see any reason for having a minimum speed, so i believe the minimum speed of any object will be 0.

Some quotes ...

Well, although speeds are relative, we find a maximum (relative) speed, which is (c), but this is not a good enough reason to think there is a minimum speed too .elas

All speeds in space are relative therefore it is impossible to determine either a maximum or minimum speed except in relation to an object whose true speed is unknown.

I don't go with you in this point at all (i see Entropy was right in this point).climbhi

Well correct me if I'm wrong but.. Heisenberg: [del]x[del]p = h/4[pi] so if [del]p->0 then ƒ¢x doesn't make sense anymore, so there must be some minimum jitternig speeds to prevent this. But I might be wrong...

If [del]p->0 it does not mean that p->0, (therefore it does not mean that v->0) so the HUP will be useless to find any good result in this conversation.

- #17

wimms

- 496

- 0

I'd add another view. What is speed? motion. What is motion? Interaction. So, zero speed is zero interaction. Now the big one - what does it mean to exist? If two particles never interact, do they exist relative to each other? Isn't stopping to complete standstill equivalent ceasing to exist? Virtual vacuum comes to mind.

- #18

FZ+

- 1,599

- 3

wimms: by that argument, there can be no minimum speed, since as t decreases, the speed *increases*.

- #19

wimms

- 496

- 0

T can decrease only upto a point, it can't be zero, this has no sense and no reality. I'd bet that minimum really possible t is actual cause for speed of c. When we talk about absolute minimum speed, we have to talk about Planck scale, then Planck length comes to mind as smallest possible length. Smallest possible length in face of smallest possible time is smallest possible velocity. Any other type of movement must be averaged complex movement.

- #20

Michael F. Dmitriyev

- 342

- 1

You have drawn a hand near to the shining truth and... immediately pull it back.Why? Does it powerfully burns? Or a heavy cargo was hanged in your hand and you can't move it?Originally posted by wimms

Speed is distance/time. Minimum speed is Planck length/planck time. Hmm, isn't it like "c"?

...

- #21

wimms

- 496

- 0

Michael, I don't understand what you mean. Care to elaborate?

ps. did you get my pm?

ps. did you get my pm?

- #22

Did you know that when light is passed through a Bose-Einstein condensate it slows to nearly 30mph...weird stuff.

All speeds in space are relative therefore it is impossible to determine either a maximum or minimum speed except in relation to an object whose true speed is unknown. -Elas

From this one might wonder what if at the speed of light a thing was seen as light(from our reference point) but from the reference point of the thing moving at light speed, light speed things looked like normal matter moving very slowly... and what if when a thing stopped moving from our point of view it slipped into a lower "reference frame of motion" and becamse something moving very fast at near the speed of light...

Is this crackpot enough?

- #23

However, this is somewhat paradoxical because Jammieg brings up an excellent point that matter at 0 speed is not matter as we know it due to the nonexistence of energy. But then again, I'm not sure the universe is just "matter as we know it."...[?]

- #24

if there was the lowest nonzero speed in a form of V=constant i will right awy invent coresponding V=const special relativity.

- #25

I've read somewhere that matter can pop in and out of existence, how does that happen! Maybe our universe is only existing on one light speed band, then again how would anyone prove something like that or why would they want to?

- #26

heumpje

- 36

- 0

Think about it: Suppose you're traveling at the speed of light. This is the only velocity which you can determine absolutly (i.e. you simply can't go any faster). Now you start slowing down. The only way to be certain that you slow down is to send a rocket at the speed of light in the direction you were heading. If you see the rocket going faster, you are certainly going slower. You would now be able (as long as you can see the rocket) to determine you're lowest velocity to be the one for which the rocket is moving fastest. When does that happen: when you're moving at c in the opposite direction. Since it is all relative c is the lowest velocity.

- #27

wimms

- 496

- 0

You might better give it a go. I'm afraid though, that you are late. Its in SR already in form of Planck scales. The only thing you might get is another look at it, which might expand our understanding.Originally posted by dr-dock

if there was the lowest nonzero speed in a form of V=constant i will right awy invent coresponding V=const special relativity.

Share:

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 640

- Last Post

- Replies
- 6

- Views
- 471

- Replies
- 8

- Views
- 266

- Replies
- 19

- Views
- 447

- Last Post

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 504

- Replies
- 15

- Views
- 383

- Replies
- 8

- Views
- 353

- Last Post

- Replies
- 6

- Views
- 2K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 14

- Views
- 1K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 306