Is the Planck Length the Ultimate Limit of Measurement?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of the Planck length and its implications for measurement limits in physics. Participants explore the theoretical boundaries of measurement at scales approaching the Planck length, considering both quantum effects and classical gravitational concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that the Planck length is the point at which quantum effects interfere with measurements, proposing a thought experiment involving photon wavelengths and Schwarzschild radii.
  • Another participant challenges the initial argument, indicating that the reasoning may be based on misinterpretations of order of magnitude estimates.
  • A different participant clarifies that the Planck length is not a strict boundary but rather a fuzzy region where quantum effects become significant.
  • Further discussion highlights that while the Planck length is well-defined, the scale at which quantum gravity becomes relevant is less precise and depends on the measurement accuracy being considered.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of the Planck length and its implications for measurement. There is no consensus on whether it represents a definitive limit or a more ambiguous threshold influenced by various factors.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of precision in measurements and the potential for significant variations depending on the context, such as the scale of measurement accuracy being discussed.

nomadreid
Gold Member
Messages
1,771
Reaction score
255
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   Reactions: 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   Reactions: 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?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
49K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K