Planck mass; time; length derived out of air?

Chaos' lil bro Order
Messages
682
Reaction score
2
Greetings,

Anyone know how the Planck mass, Planck time, and Planck length were derived in the first place? Please cite experiments or mathematics to support your comment as I'd like to intimately understand this, not just from a metaphorical standpoint.

Thanks a bunch,

Chaos' lil bro.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Chaos' lil bro Order said:
Greetings,

Anyone know how the Planck mass, Planck time, and Planck length were derived in the first place? Please cite experiments or mathematics to support your comment as I'd like to intimately understand this, not just from a metaphorical standpoint.

Thanks a bunch,

Chaos' lil bro.

The http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length" are algebraic combinations of three measured constants of nature, the speed of light, c, Planck's constant, h, and Newton's constant of gravity, G. Those constants have been measured many many times.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
They are the only possible algebraic combinations of those 3 constants which obey dimensional analysis.

Daniel.
 
Ok, then how was 'h' derived?

Ok, C, G, h.

Then how was Planck's constant 'h' derived? If possible please site an experiment, observation, or derivation since to help me understand the meaning beyond a google cut and paste.

Thanks.
 
Do you mean the concept of h or the value of h?

The concept of h came from problems in thermdynamics/electromagnetism around 1900 which predicted that the black body radiation spectrum for a cavity (like a heated oven) should have infinite energy. In order to solve this Max Planck realized you could get the right spectrum if you assumed light was made up a particles which had energy hf, where f was their frequency and h a constant. He didn't initially agree with his own work, but the results were undeniable.

To get the value of h, experiments are done. I seem to remember reading a few years ago that Josephson junctions are excellent for determining h to a very high accuracy, but solid state physics isn't my thing and I can't be sure I'm remembering that correctly.
 
Alpha, great post!

One little question:
Are you saying that the oven contains infinite energy because there can be infinite modes within it? As in a curve that extends towards but never reaches the x line?
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top