scientists think they are so smart, they say that plank length is the smallest possible distance cut plank length in half, boom, scientists proven to be idiots

File: 436 KB, 1024x487, zbbzvcbzvb.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Tue Jul 23 04:34:13 2013 No.5919342 [DELETED]

scientists think they are so smart, they say that plank length is the smallest possible distance

cut plank length in half, boom, scientists proven to be idiots

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 23 05:16:20 2013 No.5919389 > they say that plank length is the smallest possible distance No we don't

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 23 07:09:49 2013 No.5919479 >>5919342 >scientists think they are so smart relative to you, they are exceedingly smart

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 23 07:10:19 2013 No.5919481 4/10 because i liked the picture

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 23 16:39:23 2013 No.5920205 I don't understand the picture.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 23 16:49:54 2013 No.5920218 >>5920205 Me neither, some explanation would be nice.

Anonymous Wed Jul 24 00:26:54 2013 No.5920928

The Planck length can IS the smallest length. Allow me to elaborate. When blackholes form, it is because too much energy was focused into a small area. So if 1 was the capacity limit of energy in a distance, once anything more is packed into that space, a blackhole emerges. That length which holds 1 unit of energy/matter/anything/etc. is the Planck length. So if you cut it (Planck length) in half, you wouldn't still have the whole 1 energy, but instead 1/2 energy, as you took half of the whole energy. So sure you could say there is stuff smaller than the Planck length, but it wouldn't be a whole number, which describes how much energy can be placed in an area throughout the universe without causing distortion.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 24 00:30:53 2013 No.5920935 >>5920928 what makes you say that? planck time isn't the smallest time, planck mass is not the smallest mass, etc they are just natural measuring sticks for things.

Anonymous Wed Jul 24 00:36:54 2013 No.5920940

>>5920935
I'm not saying anything about Planck measurements other than length. I know nothing about Planck time/mass/etc.

I got my stuff from Brian Greene's "Hidden Reality".

If you don't know who that is (and I'll just assume no for the sake of making sure) he's a renoud physicist who has recently been cooperating with people like Neil Degrasse Tyson, and others. He specializes in quantum physics.

Anonymous Wed Jul 24 00:44:54 2013 No.5920948

>>5920928
>>5920935
>>5920940
Ugh, Amateurs....

Planck Length is the smallest possible length with any real meaning.

Just look at how it's defined: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length

It's defined using fundamental constants of the universe. Sure, maybe there are lengths smaller than that, but they wouldn't have any physical meaning according to some models of the universe.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 24 00:50:55 2013 No.5920960 >>5920948 >Calls us amateurs >Cites Wikipedia as a reliable source

Anonymous Wed Jul 24 00:53:54 2013 No.5920965

>>5920960
People are seriously still talking shit about wikipedia? Are you stuck in the early 2000's man?

Wikipedia has gotten incredibly reliable in recent years, especially the science and mathematics articles because the scientists and mathematicians that edit those articles are rigorous and love to correct mistakes.

Ask Encyclopedia Britannica why they stopped printing new ones. They got run out of business by Wikipedia.

Anonymous Wed Jul 24 00:57:53 2013 No.5920968

>>5920965
It's not because of reliability, it's because of convenience. Need proof? Ask any book publishers why they are scared of the growth in "e-readers". People find it easier to do everything from one hub rather than travel to a library to look up some trivia.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 24 01:00:53 2013 No.5920972 >>5920218 Its a parody of the sonic fanart that have sonic characters crying about religious stuff.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 24 01:02:24 2013 No.5920973 File: 794 KB, 750x4443, wikipedia.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5920968 >Still clinging to Libraries >Still believing the "Wikipedia is unreliable" garbage that lost it's validity a few years ago Get with the times old man.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 24 01:04:24 2013 No.5920974 >>5919342 the planck length is the maximum distance at which two spacial locations are indistinguishable. that is not to say that there are not "smaller" distances, but "smaller" distances in that context have no value

Anonymous Wed Jul 24 01:07:54 2013 No.5920978

>>5920973
That info graphic literally told me nothing about its accuracy. It was about the number of pages, the demographics which visited it, and something about editors which I saw talked about trying to make it more female. And what makes you imply I still use a library? I just said people use it less than Wikipedia, which your info graphic actually stated as well.

Anonymous Wed Jul 24 01:10:25 2013 No.5920982

>>5920978
Obviously you didn't read the entire infographic, because it clearly states that "Wikipedia is 98% as accurate, in comparison with college textbooks"

It also says "Wikipedia has 3.86 mistakes per article" and that "The Encyclopedia Britannica has 2.92 mistakes per article"

The sources for this information are cited at the bottom.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 24 01:11:24 2013 No.5920984 >>5920982 Also "More than 20 colleges are now helping Wikipedia with content and editing"

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 24 01:13:53 2013 No.5920987 >>5920974 Do you think this isn't a troll, or that your comment is in any way necessary? Just a heads up. Something for you to think about.

Jarl Sagan !ZelZ/AwYqE Wed Jul 24 01:15:24 2013 No.5920988
File: 61 KB, 750x600, 0626.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5920940
>brian greene
>on /sci/
geezus fuck.

>>5920935
lolwut?

>>5919389
>we
No. You, maybe. We? No.

The Planck length is the smallest possible length, because anything smaller wouldn't have length. Below that, length as defined by a physical thing doesn't happen. This is why particles smaller than this are not really particles in the way you think of particles of size larger than this.

I mean, fucking come on /sci/, can't we do better than this? I suck at mathemancy, but I understand the basic ideas
>tfw no one ITT has read feynman, krauss, hawking, cox, etc etc etc

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 24 11:07:54 2013 No.5921602 >>5920988 >The Planck length is the smallest possible length, because anything smaller wouldn't have length This has been refuted by OP. Cut the plank length in half.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 24 17:17:32 2013 No.5922310 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length >There is currently no known physical significance of the Planck length #rekt

Jarl Sagan !ZelZ/AwYqE Thu Jul 25 02:57:31 2013 No.5923035

>>5922310
>still samefagging the wiki without understanding the wiki
Just, no.

>>5921602
Okay, so tell me, in the most scientific way you can, how you would define such a length.

>hint: you can't.

But hey, if you can, I'll be the first to nominate you for not only a Nobel prize, but also King of all Cosmos. Because you will have single-handedly solved most of the issues in... just about every field of hard science right now, actually.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 25 16:40:02 2013 No.5924074 >>5923035 >Okay, so tell me, in the most scientific way you can, how you would define such a length. Plank length is defined as 1.616199(97)×10−35 meters. I'll leave it as an exercise to you to calculate half of that number.

Jarl Sagan !ZelZ/AwYqE Thu Jul 25 21:53:34 2013 No.5924708
File: 2 KB, 100x100, 1308880634918.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5924074
Okay, you can do arithmetic. Arithmetic isn't math. If you want to math, tell me the significance of such a number.
>hurrdurr infinity minus half is less than infinite

>tfw anon probably doesn't believe .9999.... = 1

Jarl Sagan !ZelZ/AwYqE Thu Jul 25 21:56:01 2013 No.5924713

>>5924708
And, fuck. I'll even drop the hint.
>science is applied math
Explain to me how a distance that is literally the smallest distance you can have before something becomes a point can be cut in half.

>hurrdurr i don't into topology. just take half the distance of a point...

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 25 22:03:31 2013 No.5924723 >>5924708 >tell me the significance of such a number. Tell me the significance of the plank length. Oh wait, there is none. See >>5922310

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 25 22:05:02 2013 No.5924724 >>5924713 Not every topology is metrizable, you fucking pleb.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 25 22:08:03 2013 No.5924729 >>5924713 The notion of "distance" doesn't give a shit whether there are points or empty space.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 25 22:10:02 2013 No.5924732 >>5924713 The notion of "distance" doesn't give a shit whether there are real objects or empty space.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 26 02:04:07 2013 No.5925053 >>5924724 >Not every topology is metrizable Lrn2discretemetric, half-a-pleb

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 26 08:04:04 2013 No.5925410 >>5925053 No, you retard. For example the Sorgenfrey topology is not metrizable. How hard did you fail your high school topology class?

Anonymous Fri Jul 26 08:21:04 2013 No.5925435

i find it funny how guys like >>5924713 claim planck length is the "smallest" length, when you can go infinitely deeper and cut the smallest length by half each time. Sure it might not hold any meaningful value in modern science but who's to say there aren't smaller distances?
Also the notion of the "smallest length possible" is ridiculous by itself because like I said, we can always divide that length by half to get a smaller one.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 26 18:50:40 2013 No.5926434 plank length * 0.9999.... Look, I found a length smaller than plank length.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 26 19:14:40 2013 No.5926516 >>5926434 0.999999=1 no you didn't

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 27 04:43:40 2013 No.5927413 >>5925435 >we can always divide that length by half to get a smaller one No, you can not. Space and time form a discretize spin network.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 27 05:04:45 2013 No.5927452 >replying to troll threads Seriously, /sci/? What's next, starting to reply to "1 =/= 0.999... " threads?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 27 07:27:11 2013 No.5927614 >>5927413 >muh spin foam >muh quantum loop gravity Shut up you fucking simian.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 27 07:38:42 2013 No.5927628 File: 1.99 MB, 500x278, FedYp31.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] ......This thread is now trolled.... Fucking idiots... all of you...

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 27 20:03:25 2013 No.5929198 >>5927452 >What's next, starting to reply to "1 =/= 0.999... " threads? Why would we not reply to them? They are interesting and math related.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 28 17:22:40 2013 No.5930894 >>5927628 I ain't even mad.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 28 17:25:09 2013 No.5930903 File: 12 KB, 471x347, Dabish.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5927628 To avoid the trolling, we're gonna call... THE BISHOP!

Anonymous Sun Jul 28 17:26:39 2013 No.5930907 [DELETED]

If the plank length exists how can objects travel diagonally?

And if they can couldn't they repeater their distance form each other at a distance smaller than the plank length.
And if they can't travel diagonally we could detect the grid structure.

Boom scientists proven to be idiots.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 29 05:32:40 2013 No.5932190 >>5927614 Loop cuantum gravity is a scientifically proved theory.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 29 19:12:39 2013 No.5933648 >>5932190 What is it about? What does it explain?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 30 00:58:38 2013 No.5934258 >>5920973 >increase female editors by 25% >increase accuracy by 25% at the same time. top kek wikipedia

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 30 07:18:38 2013 No.5934776 >>5934258 What does "top kek" mean?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 30 18:31:09 2013 No.5935957 >>5934776 It is a phrase used by retards to express their lack of understanding.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 31 12:26:10 2013 No.5937470 >plank length is the smallest possible distance This is wrong.

>>	Anonymous Thu Aug 1 06:57:26 2013 No.5939321 Plank length makes no sense.

>>	Anonymous Thu Aug 1 18:58:27 2013 No.5940567 How long is a plank?

>>	Anonymous Thu Aug 1 19:02:25 2013 No.5940579 The stupidmoon rose as the jackasses howled out in the prairie. It was the night of morons bumping troll threads.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 2 16:47:53 2013 No.5942489 >>5940579 What poem is this from?

Anonymous Fri Aug 2 16:55:24 2013 No.5942510

>>5940567

10^-35 meters, about 10^-20 times smaller than a proton.

To give you an idea how small that is, take a pin and make a slight hole in a piece of paper. Imagine that pinprick is then expanded to the size of the observable universe. The Planck Length would about the same size as another pinprick in that volume.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 2 17:07:24 2013 No.5942545 Just FYI scientists have measured distances many magnitudes smaller than the Planck length (10^-48 has been measured where the Plank length is to^-35).

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 3 14:51:03 2013 No.5944387 >>5942545 [citation needed]

Anonymous Sun Aug 4 02:23:36 2013 No.5945618

It's not so much that there isn't a smaller distance.

It's that anything less than that basically has no meaning that our brains can comprehend.

As far as science can comprehend, at the plank length scale, existence itself fucking pops in and out of existence.

Anonymous Sun Aug 4 03:15:37 2013 No.5945661

>>5945618
Oh, there's some thought to be into it.

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2011/01/updated-new-theory-a-hidden-universe-could-exist-inside-every-black-hole.html

A lot of thought to be into it. The first thing that came to mind when visualizing the smallest of the small (without the context provided via the article posted) was similar to a sphere turning itself inside out. A lot of my intuitions've been correct in the past, though this one /is/ rather absurd. Note that I thought of it in terms of 1 /2 /2 /2 /2 /2 and the composition of atoms, how they contain even smaller blocks containing even smaller blocks, etc.

Still fun to think about.

Anonymous Sun Aug 4 03:18:05 2013 No.5945664

>>5945661
Shitty article, not even the first I've seen the theory explained in (posted without reading), though the one that seemed more factual required a subscription as to view it. Can google universe exists within black hole theory to find out more though.

>>	Talimar Sun Aug 4 06:50:06 2013 No.5945822 Discrete quantum loop theory tried using it at one time.... haven't heard from it in a while. That uhm... Tau? system however got spotlight, and that was that.

>>	Anonymous Sun Aug 4 14:34:35 2013 No.5946604 >>5945822 >that uhm... Tau? system however got spotlight, and that was that. What tau system?

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 5 02:10:20 2013 No.5947798 >>5946604 The one that says pi = 2 tau

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 5 02:25:49 2013 No.5947813 >>5947798 6/10

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 5 18:14:46 2013 No.5949212 >>5947813 tau is greater than 3/5

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 5 18:18:48 2013 No.5949225 Planck length? In what frame?

>>	Anonymous Tue Aug 6 16:43:47 2013 No.5950972 >>5949225 The plank length is lorentz invariant.

>>	Anonymous Wed Aug 7 16:36:25 2013 No.5953259 >>5950972 and gauge invariant

>>	Anonymous Wed Aug 7 18:21:58 2013 No.5953582 >>5920973 >Only 20 million dollars to run wikipedia Holy shit that's cheap, Jimmy Wales could of made billions off of wikipedia donations if he was a jew.

>>	Anonymous Wed Aug 7 18:31:58 2013 No.5953598 >>5925410 >high school topology class wut

>>	Anonymous Wed Aug 7 18:45:58 2013 No.5953637 >>5920968 Here this aught to change your mind http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_Wikipedia

>>	Anonymous Thu Aug 8 08:08:48 2013 No.5954745 >>5953637 How do we know this article is reliable?

>>	Anonymous Thu Aug 8 18:12:35 2013 No.5956051 >>5954745 That's the joke.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 9 07:31:37 2013 No.5957266 >>5956051 Haha, got it now. Very funny.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 9 07:36:36 2013 No.5957278 PLEASE DONT BUMP THE THREAD, ITS ALMOST 2 MONTHS OLD. MOOT PLEASE DO SOMETHING /SCI/ IS DYING A SLOW AND PAINFUL DEATH.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 10 01:52:56 2013 No.5959085 >>5957278 lol

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 10 05:32:55 2013 No.5959231 >>5919342 Congrats, you've just discovered the difference between math and science.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/sci/ - Science & Math