this post was submitted on 05 Feb 2025
831 points (99.2% liked)

Science Memes

11961 readers
2872 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago

Why does it remind me of Max Payne for some reason ?

[–] [email protected] 14 points 18 hours ago (3 children)

Any good link for a simple explanation on how there cant be smaller length?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago

I think the best way to understand the Planck length is to understand how we came to Planck's constant in the first place. Science girl has a good video on it (she shared today that she's getting better, which is fantastic news)

[–] [email protected] 21 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

To accurately measure the size or location of something requires energy. The more precise the measurement, the more energy is required. The amount of energy required get the precision below the Planck length would literally create a black hole.

[–] lambdabeta 14 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I've never found a good link, and I'm not certain that I know best, but I can try to explain it to you.

First: an understanding of the Pauli exclusion principle. Often people ask "Why can't there be 3 electrons in that orbital, there's plenty of space?" The thing is that the electrons are completely¹ defined by just 4 numbers: spin (±½), shell (positive integer), subshell (integer from 0 to shell-1) and magnetic (integer form -subshell to +subshell). Why there can't be more than 2 electrons in the 1st shell is that you can chose spin from (±½), shell is 1, subshell has to be 0, magnetic has to be 0. Its like asking "Why can't there be 3 integers between 0 and 3, there's plenty of space?" and the answer is that whatever integer you come up with will be one of the 2 already known (1, 2).

Similarly, as I understand it, the fundamental laws of physics don't distinguish between "things" closer than 1 Planck length apart. That doesn't necessarily mean that the universe operates on a 1 Planck length grid, just that any two "things" separated by less than a Planck length are indistinguishable from one new "thing" with different properties.

I'm fairly confident in the PEP description, the Planck length one I'm less 100% sure about, but its how I understand it at least.

¹assuming a universe comprised of only a single hydrogen atom, otherwise the states of everything else in the universe can perterb the state functions and things can get messy, but usually not enough to merge shells.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Thank you for trying, your explanation is not nearly dumb enough. I feel like the match girl smelling the roast while having a bite of stale bread. There is knowledge I just can smell but not taste. The one thing I got though that clarified a bit is that Planck lengths is not a statement that space, the 3 dimensions, is quantized but rather that it's mathematically insignificant when trying to distinguish two particules separated by Less than that length.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 17 hours ago

The smallest particles are not actually balls, but are wibbly wobbly. To measure something we need to interact with it, even if we interact with it using light. But because those particles are all wibbly wobbly, we can't say for sure where they are exactly. And that unsure distance is Plancks length.

Disclaimer; I am not theoretical not a physicist, now eat your vegetables.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 19 hours ago

Planckiest violin, play me Despacito.

[–] Hacksaw 104 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Max Planck: I also just discovered the shortest amount of time something can last any ideas what I should name it?

Marie Planck: Planck time

Max Planck: :'(

[–] [email protected] 2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 69 points 1 day ago (9 children)

Would you rather it be called Max length?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 hours ago

Unhesitatingly

[–] [email protected] 4 points 16 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 17 hours ago

Insidiously

[–] [email protected] 6 points 21 hours ago

Indubitably

[–] [email protected] 8 points 23 hours ago

Doubtlessly.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 23 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago

Definitely.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 67 points 1 day ago

See it's funny bc his name is max

[–] [email protected] 50 points 1 day ago

Planck died before he finished his Grower/Shower addendum to the scale.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 day ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

Nah, I can imagine half a planck length

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 day ago

Any smaller and it’s not even there at all!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 19 hours ago (3 children)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 18 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 14 hours ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

5.303×10^-35^ feet

1.0043×10^-38^ miles

4.20x10^69^ OP's dicks

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 hours ago

Absolutely fathomable.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 hours ago

Not American enough. I need it in football fields.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 18 hours ago