Timeline for Why is the Planck length considered fundamental, but not the Planck mass?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 18, 2020 at 17:11 | comment | added | Rivers McForge | @4xion Right, I’m using “special” in the narrow sense of “not a unit of quantization” here. My impression is also that the change in physics from mass scales above the Planck mass to below the Planck mass is far less drastic than the change in physics from length scales above the Planck length to below the Planck length. | |
| Jul 17, 2020 at 23:04 | comment | added | 4xion | Seems not quite right to say that $m_p$ isn't anything special as it corresponds to the scale at which the non-renormalizable nature of gravity becomes important. Another minor comment: electric charge appears quantized but (unless we observe monopoles) there's no guarantee of this. | |
| Jul 17, 2020 at 21:27 | review | First posts | |||
| Jul 17, 2020 at 21:49 | |||||
| Jul 17, 2020 at 21:18 | history | answered | Rivers McForge | CC BY-SA 4.0 |