I would not consider the explanation I describe to be a thought experiment, but rather a mathematical derivation; although I might showing my roots as a mathema

I would not consider the explanation I describe to be a thought experiment, but rather a mathematical derivation; although I might showing my roots as a mathematician instead of a physicist there. Additionally, all the argument, as I presented it, shows is that there is some length beyond which we cannot observe. It turns out that we can calculate this length, and the result happens to be precisely the plank length. As a mathematician, this seems highly unlikely to be a coincidence; however I am not familiar enough with physics to know if this is a deep result, or a trivial consequence of it's definition. To clarify the disagreement: do you agree that our current theory predicts that there is some length beyond which we cannot measure?