High School Can Electromagnetic Fields Interact with the Planck Scale?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the challenges of probing the Planck scale, which requires extraordinarily high-energy particle accelerators, potentially the size of the solar system. Participants question whether electromagnetic fields can interact with the Planck scale and highlight that fields are continuous, existing throughout space without discrete segments. It is emphasized that high-energy collisions are necessary to explore interactions at this scale, as lower-energy particles cannot effectively probe such small distances. The conversation also touches on the theoretical implications of superstring theory and the limitations of current scientific understanding regarding the nature of space at the Planck scale. Ultimately, the consensus is that while electromagnetic fields exist everywhere, their ability to interact meaningfully at the Planck scale necessitates advanced technology that is currently beyond our reach.
  • #31
oquen said:
To clarify:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_mass
"In physics, the Planck mass, denoted by mP, is the unit of mass in the system of natural units known as Planck units. It is approximately 0.0217651 milligrams—about the mass of a flea egg."
"The Planck mass can be derived approximately by setting it as the mass whose Compton wavelength and Schwarzschild radius are equal.[3] The Compton wavelength is, loosely speaking, the length-scale where quantum effects start to become important for a particle; the heavier the particle, the smaller the Compton wavelength. The Schwarzschild radius is the radius in which a mass, if it were a black hole, would have its event horizon located; the heavier the particle, the larger the Schwarzschild radius. If a particle were massive enough that its Compton wavelength and Schwarzschild radius were approximately equal, its dynamics would be strongly affected by quantum gravity."

It's saying if the Planck length is occupied by energy, it's like the mass of a flea egg.

No. You are reading it wrong.

It's saying that if you take some particle (say, an electron) and accelerate it so much that its wavefunction can be localized to fit entirely in just one Planck length, the necessary energy for such acceleration is equivalent to a mass of a flea egg. Which is an enormous energy for an electron. We are very far from being able to give electrons (or any other particles) that much energy.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
oquen said:
But the flea mass is not the maximum that can fit inside the Planck length, correct? because in the big bang.. all the universe was once the size of a Planck length.. so I figure the mass can be higher. Back to the flea egg. If our detector can detect the mass of a flea egg in the accelerator sensor, then it means we can measure the Planck length? or no way to know if the flee egg is a real egg or mass from the Planck length?
The movement of your fingers while you typed this message produced several orders of magnitude more energy than the Planck mass. However they are interactions happening on a lot of particles (well atoms) and not on single particles (as eg an electron).
The string mass can be lower as well...
 
  • #33
nikkkom said:
No. You are reading it wrong.

It's saying that if you take some particle (say, an electron) and accelerate it so much that its wavefunction can be localized to fit entirely in just one Planck length, the necessary energy for such acceleration is equivalent to a mass of a flea egg. Which is an enormous energy for an electron. We are very far from being able to give electrons (or any other particles) that much energy.

But if someday we could accelerate particles and collide them and acquire enough energy to focus them in the Planck length with energy equal to the Planck mass.. ain't the effect the same as accelerating the electron itself to make its wavefunction be localized to fit entirely in just one Planck length??

At present.. what is the resolution of our sensor that we can distinguish whether the particles are blob or distinguish shape? is this entirely related to how much we can localize or make the wavelength smaller (by high energy) or is there other way?
 
  • #34
oquen said:
But if someday we could accelerate particles and collide them and acquire enough energy to focus them in the Planck length with energy equal to the Planck mass.. ain't the effect the same as accelerating the electron itself to make its wavefunction be localized to fit entirely in just one Planck length??

I will try one last time. There is only ONE method to "focus particles into" very small spaces - to accelerate them.

At present.. what is the resolution of our sensor that we can distinguish whether the particles are blob or distinguish shape? is this entirely related to how much we can localize or make the wavelength smaller (by high energy) or is there other way?

There is no other way.
 
  • #35
nikkkom said:
I will try one last time. There is only ONE method to "focus particles into" very small spaces - to accelerate them.
There is no other way.

Ok. Thanks. That's very clear now. So it is the quantum bullet that we must aim to reach Planck mass energy by accelerating it... I thought it was a particular Planck target that we must aim using different projectiles from all angles to reach Planck energy. No doubts about it now.

Early. It was stated the Planck area couldn't detect our radio waves because it was like amoeba feeling the wave of a tsunami. But let's say there are Calabi–Yau manifolds (or other dynamics) inside the Planck length that can transmit signal.. can they transmit it with wavelength bigger than them like as big as radio waves? Or are radio transmitters limited to the length of their antenna... In our cellphones.. we can only send microwaves the length of our cellphone antenna? but then the submarine are able to receive ELF.. can the submarine transmitter able to send ELF too.. if true.. then the Planck scale Calabi-Yau or whatever can also send radio waves (or illustrative of any wavelength larger than the Planck length?) This is just for sake of illustration.. of course I'm not implying there is radio station inside the Planck length
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
8K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K