3 ms·
They are a bit misrepresented. Think of most of them as "we know today's theory of physics breaks beyond these parameter regimes". There is no "minimal distance
by krastanov 4y ago
They are a bit misrepresented. Think of most of them as "we know today's theory of physics breaks beyond these parameter regimes". There is no "minimal distance", rather there is "distance at which our math model does not work". No need to assume that things go discrete at that distance. There are some that are in a different style though: v<c is a fundamental postulate (stated in a very cluncky way).
- bmacho 4y ago> There is no "minimal distance", rather there is "distance at which our math model does not work". The paper is talking about an other type of minimum distance: minimum measurable distance. It predicts it to be 2*planck time (pg.7): Combining the experimental limits on speed v, force F and action W using the general relation for energy E = F vt = W/t leads to a limit on measurements of time t given by t ≥ √4G~/c5. (10) The five principles thus eliminate instants of time and introduce a minimum time interval, given by √4G~/c5 ≈ 1.1 · 10−43 s, twice the Planck time.