# Of quarks and international borders

• MisterTrilby
In summary, it is impossible to determine at which point an atom crosses an international border, as the border is an imaginary line and the atom itself has a finite size. The border can be considered infinitesimally thin, but this raises questions about the possibility of anything being thinner than a quark, which is currently theorized as a pointlike object. The uncertainty principle also makes it impossible to determine the exact position of a quark on the border. This issue may be relevant in a legal context, but it ultimately becomes meaningless when considering the microscopic scale.
MisterTrilby
At what point does an atom cross an international border, and can it exist on the cusp, not in either country?

I would say that the border, not being a material object as such, is infinitesimally thin. So the atom can't possibly be as thin as the border, therefore there will be a time at which the atom can be said to be on one side of the border, straddling the border at another time, and finally on the other side of the border. The atom can be straddling the border partially, exactly on the border with half on one side and half on the other, or fully on one side or the other. No matter what, then, some part of the atom is always in a country. These are the conclusions I can draw from my limited knowledge of such things.

Thinking about this answer has raised more questions than I had before. This usually happens when I arrive at any answer. I assume that a border be infinitesimally thin, but is it that true, or even possible? Is it pointless to talk of anything that exists being thinner than the thinnest thing possible, i.e. a quark? (Is a quark the thinnest thing possible?) If so, are borders one quark thick? In which case, while an atom is going to be in one of the positions I mentioned above (straddling, 50/50 or completely over the border) a single quark could exist exactly on the border and not be in either country, right? And what about the uncertainty principle - wouldn't this make it impossible to determine the exact position of the quark anyway? And if quarks are pointlike, does this mean they have no width at all?

Can you tell me why you are THIS concerned about where an atom is across a man-made imaginary line?

Zz.

Atoms have a finite size. Quarks, and all leptons (which include electrons) for that matter, are theoretically treated as pointlike objects, although being quantum objects, they will necessarily have some uncertainty in position.

Man-made borders generally have a region of uncertainty too; some of these borders aren't even decided. However, we can take them as being of zero width if we wanted to. Just specify a line in some set of co-ordinates.

ZapperZ said:
Can you tell me why you are THIS concerned about where an atom is across a man-made imaginary line?

Zz.
I want to know because a friend of mine is a lawyer, and this had come up in a recent case. I came up with my own answer, but it opened up more questions, as so often happens. The more you know, the less you know! And the pursuit of knowledge is an end in itself.

I didn't realize that questions needed justifying on this forum; I'll know better should I decide to post again in the future.

MisterTrilby said:
I didn't realize that questions needed justifying on this forum; I'll know better should I decide to post again in the future.

I don't think ZapperZ was looking for justification. Sounds like he was just curious about a relatively bizarre question instead. I suppose I should let him speak for himself, anyway.

MisterTrilby said:
I want to know because a friend of mine is a lawyer, and this had come up in a recent case. I came up with my own answer, but it opened up more questions, as so often happens. The more you know, the less you know! And the pursuit of knowledge is an end in itself.

I didn't realize that questions needed justifying on this forum; I'll know better should I decide to post again in the future.

masudr is correct. I was just very curious as to why "an atom" crossing the boundary of an imaginary line would be an issue. It is rather bizzare, and I don't think even in a court of law, such an issue would even be considered (at least, I hope not if it has any degree of rationality). I mean, once you start disecting which part of the atom is across this imaginary line (that is yet to be physically defined) up to the quark level, then it has gotten into an absurd realm.

It is certainly not a physics problem. I hate to think how that lawyer would do if he/she finds out that a quantum particle can actually occupy several places at once.

Zz.

While the line itself is 'imaginary', there is still a definite point at which one is in one country and not in another. Another example might be the equator: there is no real line, but the part of the planet closest to the sun is a real place.

MisterTrilby said:
While the line itself is 'imaginary', there is still a definite point at which one is in one country and not in another. Another example might be the equator: there is no real line, but the part of the planet closest to the sun is a real place.

It is most of the time not on the equator, and worse, it follows a non-continuous path (jumping from hill to hill... unless you also count the atmosphere, up to what density ?)...
See, once one starts to nit-pick, the approximations that are entirely valid on a rougher scale become absurd on a smaller scale. Also, there is a tiny but entirely crucial point that Zapperz mentionned: our current understanding is that:
1) quarks are indeed point particles
2) they are at several places simultaneously
(this last point is what gives rise to the Heisenberg uncertainty you worried - correctly - about).

Also, who's defining, on the femto-meter scale, where exactly the borderline between two countries resides ? I guess legal documents have specifications which don't have that precision. So how do we decide on that scale, where the border is ? If we have no way to decide, that means that the border line is UNDEFINED at that precision, and that hence any question that depends on it, becomes meaningless.

I fully agree with Zz that if this is part of some legal debate, then one should quickly flee the country where such debate has the power of law, because the people in power became nuts !

MisterTrilby said:
While the line itself is 'imaginary', there is still a definite point at which one is in one country and not in another. Another example might be the equator: there is no real line, but the part of the planet closest to the sun is a real place.

It isn't definite, at least not to the atom, because nature couldn't care less where our human political boundaries are. This is what I meant by "imaginary".

Any lawyer who thinks an argument can be based on when an atom crosses such an imaginary line, up to the scale of the atom itself, needs to be disbared from practice.

Zz.

ZapperZ said:
It isn't definite, at least not to the atom, because nature couldn't care less where our human political boundaries are. This is what I meant by "imaginary".

Any lawyer who thinks an argument can be based on when an atom crosses such an imaginary line, up to the scale of the atom itself, needs to be disbared from practice.

Zz.

Hahahaha! I'll tell him that!

I get the impression that the argument isn't just about who owns which atoms, but he's unwilling to elaborate on the case.

## What are quarks?

Quarks are fundamental particles that make up protons and neutrons. They are the building blocks of matter and are one of the smallest known particles.

## How do quarks contribute to international borders?

Quarks do not directly contribute to international borders. However, their properties and interactions are studied in the field of particle physics, which has global collaborations and implications for international scientific advancement.

## What is the significance of understanding quarks in relation to international borders?

Understanding the properties and interactions of quarks can lead to a better understanding of the fundamental laws of nature and potentially advance technologies that could benefit all countries. Additionally, international collaborations in the study of quarks can promote cultural exchange and cooperation.

## How are quarks studied?

Quarks are studied using high-energy particle accelerators, such as the Large Hadron Collider. Scientists also use theoretical models and experiments to understand their behavior and interactions.

## Are there any practical applications of studying quarks in relation to international borders?

While there are no direct practical applications, the study of quarks has led to advancements in technologies such as medical imaging and computer technology. Additionally, international collaborations in particle physics have fostered diplomatic relationships and cultural understanding among countries.

• General Discussion
Replies
16
Views
2K
• Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
381
• Quantum Physics
Replies
38
Views
3K
• General Math
Replies
7
Views
1K
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
2K
• Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
982
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
• Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
885
• Electromagnetism
Replies
17
Views
2K
• Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
2
Views
834