2 ms·

Does this also mean, that that's the smallest unit of time? I've heard something like that from a non-physics person ten years ago, later then asked a person w

Does this also mean, that that's the smallest unit of time? I've heard something like that from a non-physics person ten years ago, later then asked a person who actually studied Physics about it, and he claimed it was bullshit?

munchbunny 7y ago
Pulling from Wikipedia, the interpretation is probably "our current models don't make meaningful predictions at shorter intervals" as opposed to "the framerate of reality". Specifically, the Planck Length is described as: It is the smallest distance about which current, experimentally corroborated, models of physics can make meaningful statements.[2] At such small distances, the conventional laws of macro-physics no longer apply, and even relativistic physics requires special treatment. Here's the article and citation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length#cite_note-3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length#cite_note-3 And a Planck time unit is the time it takes light to travel that distance.
- klingonopera 7y ago
  So in essence, distances are basically discrete units thanks to the Planck Length? (Doesn't this have the profound implication that the Coastline Paradox[0] becomes theoretically solveable?) Naturally, this doesn't necessarily imply that time, too, has to be discretely divisable, so I think I can understand how the person who studied physics sees it... [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox EDIT: On the Coastline Paradox, it's stated on the Wikipedia page (I had just thought, and linked, without reading): > "As the length of a fractal curve always diverges to infinity, if one were to measure a coastline with infinite or near-infinite resolution, the length of the infinitely short kinks in the coastline would add up to infinity.[3] However, this figure relies on the assumption that space can be subdivided into infinitesimal sections. The truth value of this assumption—which underlies Euclidean geometry and serves as a useful model in everyday measurement—is a matter of philosophical speculation, and may or may not reflect the changing realities of "space" and "distance" on the atomic level (approximately the scale of a nanometer). For instance, the Planck length, many orders of magnitude smaller than an atom, is proposed as the smallest measurable unit possible in the universe." EDIT2: > "smallest measurable unit possible" ...oh no... we still have to go deeper!

munchbunny 7y ago

Pulling from Wikipedia, the interpretation is probably "our current models don't make meaningful predictions at shorter intervals" as opposed to "the framerate of reality". Specifically, the Planck Length is described as: It is the smallest distance about which current, experimentally corroborated, models of physics can make meaningful statements.[2] At such small distances, the conventional laws of macro-physics no longer apply, and even relativistic physics requires special treatment. Here's the article and citation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length#cite_note-3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length#cite_note-3 And a Planck time unit is the time it takes light to travel that distance.

klingonopera 7y ago
So in essence, distances are basically discrete units thanks to the Planck Length? (Doesn't this have the profound implication that the Coastline Paradox[0] becomes theoretically solveable?) Naturally, this doesn't necessarily imply that time, too, has to be discretely divisable, so I think I can understand how the person who studied physics sees it... [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox EDIT: On the Coastline Paradox, it's stated on the Wikipedia page (I had just thought, and linked, without reading): > "As the length of a fractal curve always diverges to infinity, if one were to measure a coastline with infinite or near-infinite resolution, the length of the infinitely short kinks in the coastline would add up to infinity.[3] However, this figure relies on the assumption that space can be subdivided into infinitesimal sections. The truth value of this assumption—which underlies Euclidean geometry and serves as a useful model in everyday measurement—is a matter of philosophical speculation, and may or may not reflect the changing realities of "space" and "distance" on the atomic level (approximately the scale of a nanometer). For instance, the Planck length, many orders of magnitude smaller than an atom, is proposed as the smallest measurable unit possible in the universe." EDIT2: > "smallest measurable unit possible" ...oh no... we still have to go deeper!