Undergrad Is the Planck Length the Ultimate Limit of Measurement?

Click For Summary
The Planck length is considered a threshold where quantum effects significantly disrupt the application of current physical laws, making reliable measurements at smaller scales theoretically impossible. The discussion revolves around the complexities of measuring dimensions smaller than the Planck length, with emphasis on the necessity of precise energy calculations for photons used in measurement. Participants clarify that while the Planck length itself is well-defined, the boundaries for when quantum gravity becomes relevant are less precise and can vary significantly. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding the scale of measurement and the inherent uncertainties involved. Ultimately, the Planck length serves as a critical point in the study of quantum mechanics and gravity.
nomadreid
Gold Member
Messages
1,762
Reaction score
248
If I understand correctly, the Planck length, or maybe a tenth of it, is considered the point at which quantum effects mess up any attempt to apply our present physical laws, and so one could not even in theory make a dependable measurement of something smaller. However, I was wondering what would be wrong with the following simpler argument; it must be wrong somewhere because my answer is too big.

Suppose we had some slit of width d . To measure it would require a photon with a wavelength of d/2 or smaller, that is, an Energy of at least 2hc/d, the equivalent rest mass of 2h/(cd). If we try to get the photon into the slit of width d, d will have to be bigger than the Schwarzschild radius r = 2GM/c2 = 4Gh/(c3d) . That is, d>4Gh/(c3d), or d>2√(Gh/c3) , but that is a factor of 2√(2π) too big, as the Planck length is √(Għ/c3). What is wrong? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
nomadreid said:
What is wrong?

You're reading into terms of order one when you only have an order of magnitude estimate.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes nomadreid
Thanks for the reply, Vanadium 50. I ask forgiveness for my own density (hopefully less than that needed to collapse into a black hole), but I am afraid that I don't quite understand your comment. What are you saying that I am estimating?
 
nomadreid said:
If I understand correctly, the Planck length, or maybe a tenth of it, is considered the point at which quantum effects mess up any attempt to apply our present physical laws...
Not "at which quantum effects mess up..." but "around which, give or take a factor of ten or thereabouts, quantum effects must mess up..."

The statement isn't precise enough to worry about a factor of ##2\sqrt{\pi}##
 
  • Like
Likes nomadreid
Thanks, Nugatory. Ah. So the Planck length is a rather fuzzy border?
 
The Planck length is very well defined. The size where you have to worry about quantum gravity is fuzzy - just like the size where you have to worry about everything else. Are you making a 10% measurement? A 1% measurement? A 0.00000001% measurement?
 
I do not have a good working knowledge of physics yet. I tried to piece this together but after researching this, I couldn’t figure out the correct laws of physics to combine to develop a formula to answer this question. Ex. 1 - A moving object impacts a static object at a constant velocity. Ex. 2 - A moving object impacts a static object at the same velocity but is accelerating at the moment of impact. Assuming the mass of the objects is the same and the velocity at the moment of impact...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
685
Replies
47
Views
49K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K