How does the speed of light determine the size of material bodies?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between the speed of light and the size of material bodies at the particle, atomic, and molecular levels, focusing on solid state physics. Participants explore how the constant c influences the definitions of size and the implications of changing c in hypothetical scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the size of objects is determined by molecular bonds and electric forces, which are related to the speed of light through electric permittivity.
  • Others argue that the definition of "size" is crucial; if size is defined using a ruler, changes in the speed of light would not be observable as both the ruler and the objects would scale similarly.
  • A participant notes that the Bohr radius, which includes the speed of light, would scale with changes in electric permittivity, but this would not result in observable size changes due to simultaneous scaling of measurement standards.
  • There is speculation about whether a universe with a different speed of light would be indistinguishable from our own if other fundamental constants were also rescaled appropriately.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the fine structure constant must remain the same for two universes to appear identical, leading to discussions about how constants would need to scale together.
  • One participant raises the issue that the speed of light cannot be measured independently of units, complicating discussions about its variability across different theoretical frameworks.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the implications of changing the speed of light and its relationship to other constants. There is no consensus on whether a universe with a different speed of light would be distinguishable from our own, as opinions vary on the necessity of scaling other constants.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of size and measurement units, as well as the unresolved implications of changing fundamental constants on physical laws.

Aidyan
Messages
182
Reaction score
14
I'm not talking about relativistic effects, just solid state physics. I'm wondering what determines the size of objects at the particle, atomic and molecular level, and especially how the constant c enters the equations? I suppose it depends from the strength of the molecular bonds which determine the size of the molecular lattices. But this in turn depends from the electric forces, i.e. the electric permittivity, i.e. the speed of light.
 
Last edited:
Science news on Phys.org
It depends on the definition of "size".

If you use a ruler as length definition, you cannot see an effect - as your ruler will always have the length of 1 ruler.
Our current meter definition is "the distance light travels in a specific time". If you change the speed of light, the material might get modified, but your length scale changes as well. Is that the effect you are interested in?

Electron orbitals (and therefore atoms, molecules and all solid and liquid objects) have a size that scales with the Bohr radius. It includes the speed of light, so if you change this you also change the size of all atoms and molecules - but you also change the length of your ruler (in the same direction), and the length of a meter with our current definition (in the opposite direction).
 
Yes, I didn't think about that, it is quite obvious indeed. In fact, Bohr's radius scales with [itex]a_{0}\sim\varepsilon_{0}[/itex]. If that would have had another value, say [itex]x*\varepsilon_{0}[/itex], with [itex]x[/itex] some factor, Bohr's radius would be [itex]x[/itex] times [itex]a_{0}[/itex]. But we would not see any size change because our ruler of length [itex]l[/itex] would also be rescaled to [itex]x*l[/itex]. So far so good.

But I'm wondering then if we would live in a different universe with a different c, would we notice nothing different? Would the speed of light be rescaled or might it itslef even remain the same for an observer in such a universe? Since, in our universe, [itex]c=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon_{0} \mu_{0}}}[/itex], in a different universe, it scales with [itex]c'=\frac{c}{\sqrt{x}}[/itex]. But maybe clocks would tick also differently (perhaps slower just by a factor of [itex]\sqrt{x}[/itex]?!). Since a second is defined according to the frequency of the transition between the two hyperfine levels of Cs atoms etc., one should examine how that would change. But I don't know if and how that would be the case... am a bit confused at this point.
 
If instead we lived in a universe with a different c, then as long as all other fundamental constants (for example Planck's constant and the gravitational constant) were also rescaled appropriately, then we would not be able to tell the difference. For example, the fine structure constant is:
[tex]\alpha = \frac{e^2}{4\pi \varepsilon_0 \hbar c}[/tex]
This is a dimensionless number, so if we were in a different universe, it would only look the same as our universe if the fine structure constant was the same in that universe. So, we can find out how we must scale the other constants, given that we want to change ##c## to ##c'## (and I'll use a prime for the other 'new' constants in the new universe). So anyway, for both universes to look the same, we must have ##\alpha =\alpha'##
[tex]\frac{e^2}{4\pi \varepsilon_0 \hbar c} = \frac{{e'}^2}{4\pi \varepsilon_0 ' \hbar ' c'}[/tex]
and, rearranging, gives:
[tex]\frac{c'}{c} = \frac{{e'}^2 \hbar \varepsilon_0}{e^2 \hbar ' \varepsilon_0 '}[/tex]
So here, we have at least one rule for how certain constants would need to scale so that our universe looks the same. Now, if instead they did not scale like this, then our universe would not look the same. In the example I gave, if the fine structure constant was different, we would have different physics, since the 'strength' of the electromagnetic force would be different. There are other dimensionless constants, which would also need to stay the same in the new universe if we want the new universe to look the same, but the fine structure constant is the best example I could think of.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
The problem is that there is no unit-independent way to measure the speed of light.
It is perfectly valid to ask about a universe with different dimensionless constants like the fine-structure constant*. These constants can be measured in the universe, and you can examine their value. This is not true for the speed of light. And there are natural unit systems where the speed of light is exactly 1 - the speed of light cannot change at all in these units.

*there are ~25 of them in the Standard Model (if you include neutrino masses and mixing). Changing one of them always leads to different physics, but just a few of them influence the size of objects.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
11K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
457
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 130 ·
5
Replies
130
Views
17K