Why does nothing happen at the Planck mass?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the significance of the Planck mass in relation to physical phenomena, particularly why nothing notable occurs when dealing with masses around this scale. Participants explore the implications of the Planck mass in the context of elementary particles, black holes, and everyday objects, while questioning the nature of "stuff" in the universe.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that the Planck mass represents a fundamental boundary between elementary particles and black holes, noting the equality of the deBroglie wavelength and Schwarzschild radius at this mass.
  • Another participant argues that while many everyday objects weigh around the Planck mass, their larger volume and lower density prevent any significant physical phenomena from occurring.
  • Some participants assert that Planck units are merely units of measurement, questioning the expectation of unique events occurring at the Planck mass compared to other masses like one kilogram.
  • There is a call for a more precise understanding of what constitutes "stuff," with a suggestion that lumping all matter into a single category may not be productive.
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about the nature of information carried by elementary particles and black holes compared to everyday objects, indicating a lack of clarity in the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the significance of the Planck mass, with some emphasizing its fundamental nature and others questioning the expectation of unique phenomena at this scale. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the imprecision of their questions and the complexity of the concepts involved, indicating that the discussion may lack clear definitions and assumptions regarding the nature of "stuff" and the implications of Planck units.

gerald V
Messages
67
Reaction score
3
TL;DR
For "stuff" other than elementary particles or black holes, the Planck mass seems to be irrelevant. This is intriguing.
It appears as clear to me that the Planck mass has a fundamental role, since for it the deBroglie wavelength and the Schwarzschild radius are equal. So it is some borderline between elementary particles and black holes.

What intrigues me, however, is that the universe is mostly made up of „stuff“ like the moon, a cat, a book. A human hair of one centimeter length weighs about the Planck mass. But starting with a longer hair and cutting it into pieces well shorter than one centimeter, simply NOTHING happens. This is much different from the velocity of light, which plays a decisive role for everything.

Why so? What is „stuff“?

I am aware that this is not a precise question, consequently there is no precise answer. But I would be grateful for any advice. I conjecture that this has something to do with information. Elementary particles as well as black holes (I doubt the information paradox) carry no information apart from a handful of quantum numbers, whereas „stuff“ carries lot of information in a yet poorly comprehended way.

Thank you in Advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Planck mass with Planck length or time as a set would make something of border nature as you expect. Many daily things weigh Planck mass but their volume is much much larger than Planck scale cell. They are too dilute or have too low density to make something interesting to take place.
 
Planck units are just units. Why would you expect anything to happen at one Planck mass any more than at one kilogram?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Klystron
Vanadium 50 said:
Planck units are just units. Why would you expect anything to happen at one Planck mass any more than at one kilogram?
what he said (very small).jpg
 
gerald V said:
What is „stuff“?

Trying to lump everything into a single category like this is not a good idea.

It might help in formulating a more precise question if you think about what all this "stuff" is made of.

gerald V said:
I am aware that this is not a precise question, consequently there is no precise answer.

Yes. And on that basis, this thread is closed.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jim mcnamara

Similar threads

Undergrad The new definition of kg and the mass-energy equivalence
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
Undergrad The Wavefunction when Mass is Much Greater than Planck's Constant
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
Graduate Why Are Planck Mass and Energy Not Considered Extreme?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Undergrad Comparing Planck's Mass, Length, Time and Energy
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Graduate Is a black hole an elemenatry particle?
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
Undergrad Two recent tests of loop quantum gravity theory
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
Undergrad New Upper Bound of Neutrino Mass
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Undergrad What exactly happens when the Schwarzschild radial r is....
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Graduate Higgs inflation and quadratic gravity
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Undergrad The initial density of an object and its compression into a black hole
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K