# Exploring Pointlike Particles in a 3D Universe: Is Masslessness Possible?

• Daveman20
In summary: Massless particles do exist, but they are not common. They are usually associated with high-energy phenomena such as light or cosmic rays. It is possible for something to have only 2 dimensions in a 3d universe, but we cannot directly experience it. Mass comes from the energy of particles, not from their size or shape. The concept of "squeezing" something is not relevant when discussing particles. Massless particles are not imaginary, they are just not commonly encountered in our everyday experience. In summary, a particle is not necessarily "pointlike" and massless particles do exist, but they are not common. It is possible for something to have only 2 dimensions in
Daveman20
So a particle is pointlike, meaning it could verywell be massless, but anything and everything we experience is 3d, so are there any examples of something that is 2d that is also in this 3d universe?

how then could anything have mass if everything is made up of particles? You say we can't experience anything that isn't 3d, yet ask for an example of something that has only 2. Anything without depth has only 2 dimensions. A still image of anything with depth will seem like there was distance from the primary observers vantage point to the furthest away from him in it, but there is no space between postsecondary frame of references, meaning only the primary observer could have seen actual spatiality. if an atom extends so far in actual dimensions, can't we say unlike lines, its scope cannot be comprised of infinite points? For example, if a marble represented all the particles that an atom is comprised of, since something that gives everything mass must have mass itself, and the distance between your thumb and index represented the distance of a line segment that math says has infinite points in between, then why can your fingers only squeeze it so hard? Is it because massless pointlike particles are imaginary?

Last edited:

No, a particle is NOT "pointlike". That is just a useful model for very small objects.

## 1. What does it mean for a particle to be "pointlike"?

A particle is considered "pointlike" if it is so small that it has no physical dimensions and can be treated as a single point in space.

## 2. Are all particles considered to be pointlike?

No, not all particles are pointlike. For example, subatomic particles such as protons and neutrons have a finite size and cannot be treated as a single point.

## 3. What evidence supports the idea that particles are pointlike?

One of the main pieces of evidence is the success of the Standard Model of particle physics, which assumes that particles are pointlike. Additionally, experiments such as high-energy collisions at particle accelerators have shown that particles behave as if they have no size.

## 4. How does the concept of pointlike particles relate to quantum mechanics?

In quantum mechanics, particles are described as having both wave-like and particle-like properties. The idea of a pointlike particle is used to simplify calculations and simplify the description of particle behavior.

## 5. Are there any theories or models that challenge the idea of pointlike particles?

Yes, there are some theories and models that propose alternative explanations for the behavior of particles, such as string theory. These theories suggest that particles may not be pointlike, but rather made up of tiny, vibrating strings.

• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
14
Views
2K
• Classical Physics
Replies
10
Views
980
• Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
2
Views
372
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
1K
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
2K
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
9
Views
2K
• Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
9
Views
2K
• Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
13
Views
1K
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
8
Views
2K
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
1K