6
$\begingroup$

The Planck density is the Planck mass devided by the Planck volume, approximately 1093 g/cm3.

Does this quantity have any known physical relevance? The Planck mass is believed to be the smallest black hole possible, and the Planck length is believed to be the smallest meaningful length. So what about the Planck density?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ probably no one knows.... to my knowledge it is in the realm of quantum gravity, which is still under development. $\endgroup$ – Shing Oct 9 '15 at 9:50
  • $\begingroup$ thought to approach mass ( energy ) density at the Planck time $\endgroup$ – user46925 Nov 28 '15 at 10:31
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ My guess? No meaning at all. This has probably more to do with numerology than with physics... $\endgroup$ – valerio Nov 6 '16 at 9:04
3
$\begingroup$

This is the density at which the Universe can no longer be described without quantum gravity. People often loosely refer to the big bang starting with infinite density but more accurately we should start it at the Planck density as beyond that we don't have the equations to model the Universe's evolution.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Its main use is really just to be a unit based on absolutes. The kilogram is based off of a weight in Paris. This can change over time. Planck units are based off of constants. It doesn't have any physical significance in of itself, but it is useful.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Planck density - density of hypothetical Planck Star or central object of BH present there instead of singularity.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I think you have it backwards: a Planck star is a star whose density is approximately the Planck density, which I don't think really helps much here. $\endgroup$ – Kyle Kanos Aug 1 '17 at 21:08
0
$\begingroup$

Planck's density can also be interpreted as the matter density for which the spacetime torsion field induced by fermions fields becomes important, in General Relativity (or more precisely under the Einstein-Cartan-Sciama-Kibble theory). At Planck's density, torsion should kick-in, even in classical General Relativity.

$\endgroup$
-3
$\begingroup$

Many theoretical physicists consider the Planck density to be the maximum where density has a measurability and thus meaning within general relativity and quantum mechanics theory. (These quantities are already pushing well into the realm of Heisenberg limitations measurement fuzziness, and in the most extreme of general relativistic effects.) From the http://www.britannica.com/science/cosmology-astronomy/Relativistic-cosmologies#toc27602 . By definition, of the Planck volume, and the Planck mass: "An object of such mass would be a quantum black hole, with an event horizon close to both its own Compton length (distance over which a particle is quantum mechanically 'fuzzy') and the size of the cosmic horizon at the Planck time.". So, packing any more matter in would not yield any measurable or feature-imaginable effects, unless we had a quantum gravity theory to describe it. Simply reckoned, it might explode, as in another BIG Bang. In fact, the concepts are taken from early after the BIG Bang, not long after the initial shock waves, and the speed-of-light has settled to a constant, related to the density, and the general relativity and other laws of physics are just starting to govern. http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/images/planck_era.gif

It is the echo of the BIG Bang - the background radiation from the superluminal,(faster-than-light, I like to imagine) post Bang events - which persist like a cosmic Krakatoa (that bang circled the earth only four times), but with an budding universe so dense, and the Hubble Telescope, and now the experience of measuring gravitational waves, we have an incredible model which may soon be more refined.

So, like the others they indicate the extremes, shortest meaningful, measurable time, smallest black hole, and then, the maximum density. These quantities are very rough and can be used for sanity checks on models and orders of magnitude checks, as they arose from a dimensional analysis of quantities as they were first resolved.

$\endgroup$

protected by Community Feb 11 at 19:25

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.