On Monday, October 28, 2019 at 8:24:39 AM UTC-6, John Clark wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 8:56 PM Alan Grayson <[email protected]
> <javascript:>> wrote:
>
> On Sunday, October 27, 2019 at 10:04:42 AM UTC-6, Lawrence Crowell wrote:
>>
>> *Quantum mechanics makes no particular prediction on the continuity of
>>> spacetime. If one equates the Schwarzschild radius with a Compton
>>> wavelength you get the Planck scale of 1.6x10^{-35}m. However, this really
>>> just tells us one is not able to locate a qubit in a region smaller than
>>> this scale. The Fermi and Integral spacecraft data on arrival times of
>>> different wavelengths of radiation from burstars indicates spacetime is
>>> smooth to two orders of magnitude smaller than the Planck length.*
>>>
>>
>> *> You're out of my depth here. If the Schwartzshild radius has one
>> value, and the Compton wavelength has another value, why would anyone want
>> to equate them? AG*
>>
>
> The Compton wavelength of a particle is just the wavelength light would
> have if the mass of the particle were converted to energy. As the
> wavelength gets smaller the energy gets larger, at some point the energy
> gets so high and the distance so small it turns into a Black Hole; that
> distance is the Planck length the time it takes light to move that distance
> is the Planck Time and the amount of mass required is the Planck Mass which
> is about the mass of a flea egg. The most acceleration anything can have
> is the Planck Acceleration, it is the amount of acceleration needed to move
> something from a speed of zero to the speed of light in the Planck Time,
> and the hottest that things can get is the Planck Temperature (1.4*10^32
> Kelvin) because anything hotter would start radiating Black Holes instead
> of Blackbody Radiation. Or at least that's what Quantum Mechanics says, but
> if the evidence from the Fermi and Integral spacecraft holds up and
> spacetime really is smooth then something is wrong with this picture.
>
> John K Clark
>
That is basically it. The Planck scale does not say that spacetime is
sliced and diced up into chunks. It just says that if you try to localize a
qubit onto a region smaller than √(Għ/c^3) ~ 1.6×10^{-35}m one gets a
quantum of black hole that conceals the qubit for a tiny time interval
√(Għ/c^5) ~ 5×10^{-44}sec before it explodes into a huge number of low mass
particles. It is a sort of Heisenberg microscope argument.
The LQG machers were forced into a frantic fix on their loop theories that
had spacetime chopped up near the Planck scale. The data very much appears
to indicate that spacetime is not built up from chunks, but instead it may
be built from nonlocal quantum entanglements. So rather than spacetime
being a highly localized structure, with it might be added a lot of fine
tuning of variables, it is more an emergent phenomenon due to nonlocaly of
QM and entanglements.
LC
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/34884357-b427-453a-9977-403efe2af366%40googlegroups.com.
