What Is the Lightest Weight Measurable by a Sensitive Scales?

  • Thread starter Thread starter scupydog
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Weight
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The lightest measurable weight on a sensitive scale is fundamentally linked to the concept of mass, with the Planck mass (2.176 × 10-8 kg) being the smallest mass that can exist in nature. Discussions highlighted that while elementary particles like neutrinos are often considered to have minimal mass, the Planck mass represents a theoretical limit. Weight, defined as mass multiplied by gravitational acceleration, varies based on location, but the absolute smallest weight theoretically approaches zero under specific conditions. The conversation also clarified that photons possess zero rest mass, further complicating the understanding of mass and weight at quantum levels.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of mass and weight concepts in physics
  • Familiarity with Planck units, specifically Planck mass and Planck length
  • Basic knowledge of elementary particles, particularly neutrinos and photons
  • Comprehension of gravitational effects on weight measurement
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of Planck mass in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the properties and significance of neutrinos in particle physics
  • Study the relationship between mass, weight, and gravity in different environments
  • Investigate the concept of relativistic mass and its application to photons
USEFUL FOR

Students and enthusiasts in physics, particularly those interested in quantum mechanics, particle physics, and the fundamental principles of mass and weight measurement.

scupydog
Messages
101
Reaction score
0
Scupydog is my dad i would like to ask a question that my dad thinks he can answer.

If you had a very sensitive weighing scales and you put the lightest thing on them, what would it weigh.

Daisy 11. :smile:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Everything that is matter has mass. A bread crumb has a weight.
 
Werg22 said:
Everything that is matter has mass. A bread crumb has a weight.

What would have the smallest mass.
 
To my knowledge, an elementary particle called the neutrino has the smallest mass. I could be wrong, however.
 
The smallest mass that can exist in nature is 2.176 × 10-8 kg which is the Planck mass. I don't know what has that mass though..
 
Weight is a force, it depends on the mass of thing you're weighing and the acceleration due to gravity where you are. weight=mass*gravity

Basically you weigh more when gravity is stronger, gravity is about the same everywhere on the surface of the Earth, but actually it's slightly stronger at the poles - if you went to the North Pole you'd weigh more than if you were on the equator!
 
He meant mass, so weight doesn't have much to do with this.

Either way you see it, the lightest thing would be the thing with the smallest mass, if you compare it to something with the same gravitational force on it...
 
Jarle said:
The smallest mass that can exist in nature is 2.176 × 10-8 kg which is the Planck mass. I don't know what has that mass though..

My dad said the same thing.:smile:
 
Yes I did, son.


:P
 
  • #10
Jarle said:
Yes I did, son.


:P

Daisy is an odd name for a son :)
 
  • #11
Oh, it's a girl. Oh well, my lie has been revealed.
 
  • #12
Werg22 said:
To my knowledge, an elementary particle called the neutrino has the smallest mass. I could be wrong, however.
I don't that what she's asking. That would the wo..universe's lightest object but not the smallest mass possible. I don't know if there's a limit to how small things could get.
 
  • #13
Yes there is, and it is restricted to the Planck length as far as I know. The smallest 'amount' of mass that can be set in the smallest possible volume (planckmeter^3) is excactly the Planckmass.

If you are talking about weight, the smallest theoretical possible weight is 0, if not other mass is affecting the object, or is affecting it equally on all sides.
But weight is not the question here, because it differs.
 
  • #14
scupydog said:
My dad said the same thing.:smile:
The electron, which is certainly NOT the lightest particle of matter in the universe, is nearly a million million millon million times lighter than anything that might have Planck mass.

This may give you some idea: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_(mass)
Werg22 said:
To my knowledge, an elementary particle called the neutrino has the smallest mass. I could be wrong, however.

The last time I stood on a weighing scale, it showed a little more than a few eV. :-p
 
Last edited:
  • #15
Jarle said:
The smallest mass that can exist in nature is 2.176 × 10-8 kg which is the Planck mass.
How is it then, that this is roughly the mass of one of my hairs? I can name a lot of things that are lighter than this.

daisy said:
My dad said the same thing.
Even dads can be wrong every once in a while. Most of the time, they're right though!
 
Last edited:
  • #16
Gokul43201 said:
How is it then, that this is roughly the mass of one of my hairs? I can name a lot of things that are lighter than this.


Even dads can be wrong every once in a while. Most of the time, they're right though!

Haha, there was a time were I took my dad for a textbook. The innocence of childhood... :-p
 
  • #17
Gokul43201 said:
How is it then, that this is roughly the mass of one of my hairs? I can name a lot of things that are lighter than this.

You tell me! :bugeye:

I thought the Planck units were the smallest units you could use, and that exists...
 
  • #18
Why don't you look up what Planck mass means and how it is defined?
 
  • #19
I did, I read an article about it... I'll look up on it again...
 
  • #20
no offense but this question has no meaning of course it would find the wieght if it was SENSITIVE ENOUGH! if not it would'nt register anythinf
 
  • #21
you'd probably need a cyclotron or something in that high-energy category to even detect its presence, let alone measure it
 
  • #22
Well, the weight was supposed to measure it's WEIGHT, not it's amount of energy, right?

I read about Plancks constant, didn't udnerstand a thing, wikipedia is so unclear on definitions.

What IS the smallest weight then?
 
  • #23
Jarle said:
What IS the smallest weight then?

There is none, AFAIK. There might be a particle* which has the smallest measured mass (let's avoid weight), but if you're looking for an absolute lower limit (greater than 0) set by nature, I don't think there is one. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

*most probably a neutrino, as of now
 
  • #24
I really was convinced that this lower limit was the Planck mass.

I find it hard to believe that you could cut material in half endlessly and never get to the point where you can't cut no more.
 
  • #25
Jarle said:
I read about Plancks constant, didn't udnerstand a thing, wikipedia is so unclear on definitions.

Here is the wiki article on the Planck Mass: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_mass.

I think the definition here is quite clear.
 
  • #26
You can't actually weigh a photon but I suppose they have as small a mass as is conceivable - zero.
 
  • #27
cristo said:
Here is the wiki article on the Planck Mass: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_mass.

I think the definition here is quite clear.

if i get three pieces of string of Planck length and form them into a circle then the diameter is less than the Planck length
 
  • #28
scupydog said:
if i get three pieces of string of Planck length and form them into a circle then the diameter is less than the Planck length

What do you intend to make these pieces of string out of? The Planck length is of the order 10-35m, whereas the radius of an atom is of the order 10-13m.
 
  • #29
cristo said:
Here is the wiki article on the Planck Mass: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_mass.

I think the definition here is quite clear.

cristo said:
What do you intend to make these pieces of string out of? The Planck length is of the order 10-35m, whereas the radius of an atom is of the order 10-13m.
so the Planck length has to be a circumferance because it can't be a radius or must it be a radius
 
Last edited:
  • #30
As for the wiki article mentioned, I would not say that the Planck mass is the smallest mass possible. It is the mass of a particular type of black hole whose radius is 'roughly' the Planck length. It might result that it is the densest mass possible (just a wild guess).
 

Similar threads

High School The Effect of Linear and Rotational Motion on Measured Weight
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
772
Undergrad Bicycle front tire wobble due to weight on the back of the bike
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
High School Lewis C. Epstein's "Battleship Floating in a Bathtub"
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
1K
Undergrad Calculating your weight in an elevator
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
Undergrad What is the pressure and force exerted in Earth's core?
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
High School What forces act on a bar when you do pull-ups?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
High School What Is Mass and How Is It Defined in Physics?
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
High School How does the weight on a scale change when an object is submerged in water?
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
Undergrad What is the Uncertainty in the Total Weight of a Collection of Similar Items?
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
High School What is my apparent weight in water?
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K