# Amature question

1. Mar 18, 2005

### kalikid021

Does an electron have enough mass to have any effect on the fabric of Space-Time? How ever small? And if so In theory would that electron produce a miniscule amount of frame dragging on that fabric? And if we could build instruments sensetive enough to detect those effects, would we there by be able to calculate the spin and direction of that electron indirectly sidestepping the quantum uncertainty priciple?

2. Mar 31, 2005

### Jonny_trigonometry

I like the way you think. I had a similar idea using SR rather than GR... According to SR, simultaneity is relative for different frames of referance, so if an event (the simultaneous occurance of two things at a single moment, such as at 1 sec, particle A is a distance D from particle B) is observed to occur in a particular way in frame S, it will occur differently in frame S'. Therefore, if you take into accout the observations of a specific interaction from two different frames (and resolve the differences in simultaniety between frames), you may be able to determine both position and momentum at the same moment, overcomming the uncertainty principle.

Quantum spin assumes the electron takes up physical space otherwise it wouldn't be able to spin. This means that it's not a point, but that it has a surface (although the electron's radius hasn't been determined). All this implies that (assuming electrons can overcome the coulumb force between them) they can touch each other, and therefore the ammount of space-time curvature has a limit. The limit is the distance between the centers of the two kissing electrons, ie. 2Re. That is the maximum ammount of thier influence on space-time.

If electrons were points, then the smallest distance between them approaches zero, not 2Re. If this were the case, each electron would be composed of an infinate ammount of energy, and would curve space-time to the point where it's discontinuous at the electron's center. This type of behavior only resembles something similar to a black hole in the quantum scale.

Personally, I don't know what to think.

3. Apr 1, 2005

### Jonny_trigonometry

what do you think? is this a valid way of overcomming the uncertainty principle? Using SR in this way? anybody?

4. Apr 2, 2005

### selfAdjoint

Staff Emeritus
I have responded to your idea over on the Transporter thread. Bottom line, no. Sorry.

5. Apr 2, 2005

### Jonny_trigonometry

thanks self adjoint, that helps. My physics teacher was trying to persuade the class that the electron must have a radius though, or else at it's center it would contain an infinate potential, which simply can't be the case. But my main question about the uncertainty principle being indirectly overcome using different referance frames... what do you think? (the idea about taking advantage of the reletivity of simultenaity)

6. Apr 2, 2005

### Jonny_trigonometry

ok, i'll trust you... I just can't see why not right now (maybe when I start thinking of a way to make an experiment I'll see why).

7. Apr 30, 2005

### cherlin

In standard quantum mechanics, the self-energy (both electrical and gravitational) of a point electron is infinite but not observable, so physicists just ignore it. In string theory, electrons (like everything else) are looped around the smallest dimensions of space, which sets a minimum size for everything.

Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook