- 8,130
- 575
Planck length is ~ [itex]1.6\times 10^{-35}[/itex] meters. Does this mean that this may be a lower limit on meaningful wavelength and therefore upper limit on energy?
The discussion centers around the implications of the Planck length as a potential lower limit on meaningful wavelength and an upper limit on photon energy. Participants explore theoretical and experimental aspects related to the Planck length, its significance in physics, and the behavior of photons at extreme scales.
Participants do not reach a consensus on the implications of the Planck length or the validity of claims regarding photon wavelengths. Multiple competing views remain regarding the interpretation of the Doppler effect and its applicability in extreme conditions.
Limitations include the lack of experimental evidence for claims made about photon behavior at the Planck scale and the dependence on specific frames of reference for the discussion of wavelengths and energies.
Vanadium 50 said:In some frame, every photon has a wavelength less than that.
I "believe" that it works within the ranges that have been measured - and a bit more, perhaps. The simple formulae will almost certainly not apply.Vanadium 50 said:Do you believe in the Doppler effect or not?
I imagine that the effect is Monotonic but, in extreme situations, why would Beta necessarily apply in the way you imply? Already, we use two Doppler formulae, with and without SR so why assume that something else doesn't kick in at a singularity. The only reason I posted a reply to you post was your use of "believe" in the context of the conditions that are being discussed.Vanadium 50 said:But the Doppler effect is cumulative. Boost by beta=.6 and you double the frequency. Boost by beta=.6 again and you double the frequency again. Repeat as necessary.