#planck length

Ask Ethan: Why is there a limit to what physics can predict?

"Why are there these units (Planck units) which you can't further divide?"

There are fundamental limits to the Universe, in the sense that there are scales where our laws of physics break down. You can't break matter or energy up into infinitely small pieces, and the same goes -- we think -- for space and time. But is that necessarily all true, and is that what the Planck scale means? Not quite. Rather, these are scales at which our laws of physics stop giving reliable predictions, as we make these mass, energy, length and time scales out of three constants fundamental to our physical theories: the gravitational constant, the speed of light and Planck's constant. They do have strong physical implications, but they don't necessarily mean these scales can't be divisible further. After all, every particle in existence has a mass far below the Planck mass!

"Recent developments in theoretical physics, particularly surrounding quantum gravity and quantum computing, suggest that the world beneath the #Plancklength (\(<1.6 \times 10^{-35}\) meters) may not be a void, but rather a domain of fundamental, pixelated information. Quantum computers are increasingly seen as the essential tool to unlock this regime. The 'Planck Computer' HypothesisResearchers are proposing that the universe itself operates as a quantum gravity computer, where the fundamental unit of information is linked to the Planck scale. Fundamental 'Ticking': Matter appears to "tick" at the reduced Compton frequency, with each tick representing one bit of information, corresponding to a Planck mass event. Information Density: Calculations indicate the universe processes information at an enormous rate—approximately \(4.28 \times 10^{60}\) bits per Planck time—supporting the idea that the universe is a computational engine. Beyond the Length Limit: While the Planck length is often cited as the smallest meaningful length, new models, like those explored by MDPI, suggest a structure that allows for quantized gravity, implying a 'trans-Planckian' regime where space is not continuous. Quantum Computing as a ProbeQuantum computers offer a way to explore these scales, not necessarily by direct observation (which is forbidden by the creation of micro-black holes), but through indirect calculation and simulation. Computational Rate Density (CRD): Emerging quantum technology is expected to soon surpass the Planck CRD (\(1.37 \times 10^{2490} \text{ operations } \text{m}^{-3} \text{s}^{-1}\)). Simulating the Unknown: Quantum computers can simulate physical systems, such as the Fermi-Hubbard model, to help reveal how spacetime might act like a 'bubbly' quantum foam of fluctuating, wormhole-like distortions.  Validating Quantum Gravity: The success or failure of these computers to handle these high-density computations may validate or challenge current theories of quantum gravity. Theoretical Landscape Below the Planck ScaleQuantum Foam: Instead of smooth spacetime, the region is theorized to be a 'bubbly mess' of fluctuating spacetime. Discrete Reality: The universe might be discrete, or pixelated, with Planck volumes acting as the fundamental bits of information. Limits of Knowledge: While some theories...suggest that trying to measure something smaller than the Planck length creates a black hole, quantum computation seeks to bypass these limits by simulating the fundamental information structure.These advances are rapidly turning what was once pure philosophy into a new frontier for computational physics."

@PhysicsExplainedVideos

He was like the size of a sweater pill

RELATIVITY Is WRONG: BOOSTED CAVITY PARADOX: NOT ALL INERTIAL FRAME ARE EQUIVALENT The Principle of Relativity is that the physical laws are the same in all inertial frames. However, armed with Gravitation theory and Quantum physics, we find that the SPEED OF A FRAME, IF HIGH ENOUGH, CAN BE DETECTED WITHIN THE FRAME. Although quite simple, the idea is new, and it brings a serious contradiction…