Is the Planck Length a 3d area?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the concept of the Planck length as the smallest possible 3D area and its implications for understanding space. It questions whether every 3D area, regardless of size, must possess measurable dimensions of length, width, and depth, and whether these dimensions can be further divided. The conversation highlights the distinction between size and mass, suggesting that fundamental quanta represent the smallest building blocks of the universe. It emphasizes that the Planck length, derived from Max Planck's natural units, serves as a conceptual framework rather than a definitive measure of space.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Planck length and its significance in physics
  • Familiarity with concepts of dimensionality in geometry
  • Basic knowledge of quantum mechanics and fundamental particles
  • Awareness of string theory and quantum loop gravity
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of Planck length in quantum mechanics
  • Explore string theory and its relation to spacetime
  • Investigate quantum loop gravity and its concepts
  • Study the relationship between size and mass at quantum levels
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of theoretical physics, and anyone interested in the fundamental nature of space and time.

Imafungi
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
If so, is 'its half' also not a real size of space?

What I am asking is pretty much; what is the meaning of the notion of a 'smallest possible' 3d area? What is the meaning of that cusp between 2d and 3d?
Almost like asking what is in between 1.999999999999(repeating) and 2.

Must every 3d area, even the smallest, have some greater than 0 value of length,width and depth? Therefore must those values of length, width and depth be dividable further?

I think the answer might have to do with the Planck length not being a quantitative and qualitative area of 'a pure space of absolute nothing' but a quantitative and qualitative area of common denomination related to the substantial nature of fundamental quanta, but I am not sure.

And I realize the notion of size is different than the notion of mass, though when getting down to the smallest sized levels I think there might be a relation, that is to say; at some point matter can only be dissected so many times, and this perhaps is the idea of fundamental minute quanta that are the smallest possible building blocks of the universe. Is it possible the smallest sized of which happens to be the massless photon?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Planck length is merely an idea; it's what you get when you follow Max Planck's system of "natural" units.

If you want to learn about "what may be underneath the hood" of spacetime you will need to investigate string theory or quantum loop gravity.

See http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/planck/node2.html
 

Similar threads

Calculating the Planck Length
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Undergrad Is the Planck length the smallest measurable length?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Graduate Historical clarification of the Planck formula of blackbody radiation
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
High School Planck Length and Lorentz Contraction
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Undergrad Is the Planck length a proper length?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Graduate How can the Planck length be claimed to be the smallest length?
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
49K
Graduate The naturalness of the zeon length scale
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Undergrad Did I figure-out z-translation of 2D-coordinates correctly?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Undergrad What Are the Limits of the Universe According to Cosmologists?
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
4K
Graduate Questions Concerning The Planck Epoch
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K