Not logged in Talk Contributions Create account Log in

Article Talk Search Wikipedia

Read Edit View history More

Planck units
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Main page In particle physics and physical cosmology, Planck units are a set of units of measurement defined exclusively in
Contents terms of five universal physical constants, in such a manner that these five physical constants take on the numerical
Featured content value of 1 when expressed in terms of these units.
Current events
Random article Originally proposed in 1899 by German physicist Max Planck, these units are also known as natural units because the
Donate to Wikipedia origin of their definition comes only from properties of nature and not from any human construct. Planck units are only
Wikipedia store one system of several systems of natural units, but Planck units are not based on properties of any prototype object or
Interaction particle (that would be arbitrarily chosen), but rather on only the properties of free space.
Help Planck units have significance for theoretical physics since they simplify several recurring algebraic expressions of
About Wikipedia
physical law by nondimensionalization. They are relevant in research on unified theories such as quantum gravity. The
Community portal
Planck scale expresses the region in which the predictions of the Standard Model of quantum field theory and of
Recent changes
Contact page general relativity are no longer reconcilable, and quantum effects of gravity are expected to dominate. This occurs at
energy 1.22 1019 GeV (the Planck energy), at times 5.39 1044 s (the Planck time) and length 1.62 1035 m (the
Tools
Planck length).
What links here
Related changes The five universal constants that Planck units, by definition, normalize to 1 are:
Upload file
Special pages
the speed of light in a vacuum, c,
Permanent link the gravitational constant, G,
Page information the reduced Planck constant, ,
Wikidata item 1
the Coulomb constant, 40
Cite this page
the Boltzmann constant, k B
Print/export
Create a book Each of these constants can be associated with a fundamental physical theory or concept: c with special relativity, G
Download as PDF with general relativity, with quantum mechanics, 0 with electric charge (electromagnetism), and k B with the notion of
Printable version temperature (statistical mechanics and thermodynamics).
Languages
Contents [hide]

1 Base units
2 Significance
Bosanski 2.1 Cosmology
Catal 3 Derived units
etina 4 History
Deutsch 5 List of physical equations
6 Alternative choices of normalization
Espaol 6.1 Gravity
Esperanto
6.2 Electromagnetism

6.3 Temperature
Franais

7 Planck units and the invariant scaling of nature
8 See also
Italiano 9 Notes
10 References
Magyar 11 External links
Nederlands

Norsk nynorsk Base units [ edit ]
Ozbekcha/
All systems of measurement feature base units: in the International System of Units (SI), for example, the base unit of
Polski length is the metre. In the system of Planck units, the Planck base unit of length is known simply as the Planck length,
Portugus the base unit of time is the Planck time, and so on. These units are derived from the five dimensional universal physical
constants of Table 1, in such a manner that these constants are eliminated from fundamental equations of physical law
Simple English when physical quantities are expressed in terms of Planck units. For example, Newton's law of universal gravitation,
Slovenina
Slovenina
/ srpski
Srpskohrvatski /

converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
 can be expressed as
Suomi
Svenska
/tatara
Trke
Both equations are dimensionally consistent and equally valid in any system of units, but the second equation, with G
Ting Vit missing, is relating only dimensionless quantities since any ratio of two like-dimensioned quantities is a dimensionless
quantity. If, by a shorthand convention, it is axiomatically understood that all physical quantities are expressed in terms
Edit links
of Planck units, the ratios above may be expressed simply with the symbols of physical quantity, without being scaled
by their corresponding unit:

In order for this last equation to be valid (without G present), F, m1, m2, and r are understood to be the dimensionless
numerical values of these quantities measured in terms of Planck units. This is why Planck units or any other use of
natural units should be employed with care; referring to G = c = 1, Paul S. Wesson wrote that, "Mathematically it is an
acceptable trick which saves labour. Physically it represents a loss of information and can lead to confusion."[1]

Table 1: Dimensional universal physical constants normalized with Planck units

Constant Symbol Dimension Value in SI units with uncertainties[2]
2.997 924 58 108 m s1
Speed of light in vacuum c L T1
(exact by definition of metre)
Gravitational constant G L3 M1 T2 6.674 08(31) 1011 m3kg1s2[3]
h
= 2
Reduced Planck constant where h is the Planck L2 M T1 1.054 571 800(13) 1034 Js[4]
constant
1
40 8.987 551 787 368 1764 109 kg m3 s2 C2
Coulomb constant where 0 is the permittivity of L3 M T2 Q2 (exact by definitions of ampere and metre)
free space
Boltzmann constant kB L2 M T2 1 1.380 648 52(79) 1023 J/K[5]

Key: L = length, M = mass, T = time, Q = electric charge, = temperature.

As can be seen above, the gravitational attractive force of two bodies of 1 Planck mass each, set apart by 1 Planck
length is 1 Planck force. Likewise, the distance traveled by light during 1 Planck time is 1 Planck length. To determine,
in terms of SI or another existing system of units, the quantitative values of the five base Planck units, those two
equations and three others must be satisfied to determine the five unknown quantities that define the base Planck
units:

Solving the five equations above for the five unknowns results in a unique set of values for the five base Planck units:
Table 2: Base Planck units

Base Planck units v t e

Name Dimension Expression Value [2] (SI units)
Planck length Length (L) 1.616229(38) 1035 m[6]

Planck mass Mass (M) 2.176470(51) 108 kg[7]

Planck time Time (T) 5.39116(13) 1044 s[8]

Planck charge Electric charge (Q) 1.875545956(41) 1018 C[9][10][11]

Planck temperature Temperature () 1.416808(33) 1032 K[12]

Table 2 clearly defines Planck units in terms of the fundamental constants. Yet relative to other units of measurement

converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
such as SI, the values of the Planck units are only known approximately. This is mostly due to uncertainty in the value
of the gravitational constant G.
Today the value of the speed of light c in SI units is not subject to measurement error, because the SI base unit of
length, the metre, is now defined as the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of
1
299 792 458 of a second. Hence the value of c is now exact by definition, and contributes no uncertainty to the SI
equivalents of the Planck units. The same is true of the value of the vacuum permittivity 0, due to the definition of
1
ampere which sets the vacuum permeability 0 to 4 107 H/m and the fact that 00 = c2 . The numerical value of the
reduced Planck constant has been determined experimentally to 44 parts per billion, while that of G has been
determined experimentally to no better than 1 part in 8300 (or 120 000 parts per billion).[2] G appears in the definition
of almost every Planck unit in Tables 2 and 3. Hence the uncertainty in the values of the Table 2 and 3 SI equivalents
of the Planck units derives almost entirely from uncertainty in the value of G. (The propagation of the error in G is a
function of the exponent of G in the algebraic expression for a unit. Since that exponent is 12 for every base unit other
than Planck charge, the relative uncertainty of each base unit is about one half that of G. This is indeed the case;
according to CODATA, the experimental values of the SI equivalents of the base Planck units are known to about 1 part
in 16 600, or 60 000 parts per billion.)

Significance [ edit ]
Planck units are free of anthropocentric arbitrariness. Some physicists argue that communication with extraterrestrial
intelligence would have to employ such a system of units in order to be understood.[13] Unlike the metre and second,
which exist as base units in the SI system for historical reasons, the Planck length and Planck time are conceptually
linked at a fundamental physical level.
Natural units help physicists to reframe questions. Frank Wilczek puts it succinctly:

We see that the question [posed] is not, "Why is gravity so feeble?" but rather, "Why is the proton's mass
so small?" For in natural (Planck) units, the strength of gravity simply is what it is, a primary quantity, while
the proton's mass is the tiny number [1/(13 quintillion)].[14]

While it is true that the electrostatic repulsive force between two protons (alone in free space) greatly exceeds the
gravitational attractive force between the same two protons, this is not about the relative strengths of the two
fundamental forces. From the point of view of Planck units, this is comparing apples to oranges, because mass and
electric charge are incommensurable quantities. Rather, the disparity of magnitude of force is a manifestation of the
fact that the charge on the protons is approximately the unit charge but the mass of the protons is far less than the unit
mass.

Cosmology [ edit ]
Main article: Chronology of the Universe
In Big Bang cosmology, the Planck epoch or Planck era refers to the earliest stage of the Big Bang, before the time
passed was equal to the Planck time, tP, or approximately 1043 seconds.[15] There is no currently available physical
theory to describe such short times, and it is not clear in what sense the concept of time is meaningful for values
smaller than the Planck time. It is generally assumed that quantum effects of gravity dominate physical interactions at
this time scale. At this scale, the unified force of the Standard Model is assumed to be unified with gravitation.
Inconceivably hot and dense, the state of the Planck epoch was succeeded by the Grand unification epoch, where
gravitation is separated from the unified force of the Standard Model, in turn followed by the Inflationary epoch, which
ended after about 1032 seconds (or about 1010 tP).[16]
Relative to the Planck epoch, the universe today looks extreme when expressed in Planck units, as in this set of
approximations:[17][18]

Table 5: Today's universe in Planck units.

Property of Approximate number
Equivalents
present-day Universe of Planck units
Age 8.08 1060 tP 4.35 1017 s, or 13.8 109 years
Diameter 5.4 1061 lP 8.7 1026 m or 9.2 1010 light-years
3 1052 kg or 1.5 1022 solar masses (only counting stars)
Mass approx. 1060 mP
1080 protons (sometimes known as the Eddington number)
2.725 K
Temperature 1.9 1032 TP
temperature of the cosmic microwave background radiation

converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
 Cosmological constant 2 1.9 1035 s2
5.6 10122 tP
1
Hubble constant 1.18 1061 tP 67.8 (km/s)/Mpc

Further information: Time-variation of physical constants and Dirac large numbers hypothesis
The recurrence of large numbers close or related to 1060 in the above table is a coincidence that intrigues some
theorists. It is an example of the kind of large numbers coincidence that led theorists such as Eddington and Dirac to
develop alternative physical theories (e.g. a variable speed of light or Dirac varying-G theory).[19] After the
measurement of the cosmological constant in 1998, estimated at 10122 in Planck units, it was noted that this is
suggestively close to the reciprocal of the age of the universe squared.[20] Barrow and Shaw (2011) proposed a
modified theory in which is a field evolving in such a way that its value remains ~ T2 throughout the history of the
universe.[21]

Derived units [ edit ]

In any system of measurement, units for many physical quantities can be derived from base units. Table 3 offers a
sample of derived Planck units, some of which in fact are seldom used. As with the base units, their use is mostly
confined to theoretical physics because most of them are too large or too small for empirical or practical use and there
are large uncertainties in their values.

Table 3: Derived Planck units

Name Dimension Expression Approximate SI equivalent
Planck area Area (L2) 2.6121 1070 m2

Planck volume Volume (L3) 4.2217 10105 m3

Planck momentum Momentum (LMT1) 6.52485 kg m/s

Planck energy Energy (L2MT2) 1.9561 109 J

Planck force Force (LMT2) 1.21027 1044 N

Planck power Power (L2MT3) 3.62831 1052 W

Planck density Density (L3M) 5.15500 1096 kg/m3

Planck energy density Energy density (L1MT2) 4.633 10113 J/m3

Planck intensity Intensity (MT3) 1.38893 10122 W/m2

Planck angular frequency Angular frequency (T1) 1.85487 1043 rad/s

Planck pressure Pressure (L1MT2) 4.633 10113 Pa

Planck current Electric current (QT1) 3.4789 1025 A

Planck voltage Voltage (L2MT2Q1) 1.04295 1027 V

Planck impedance Resistance (L2MT1Q2) 29.9792458

Planck acceleration Acceleration (LT2) 5.560815 1051 m/s2

The charge, as other Planck units, was not originally defined by Planck. It is a unit of charge that is a natural addition to
the other units of Planck, and is used in some publications.[22][23] The elementary charge, measured in terms of the
Planck charge, is

where is the fine-structure constant

Some Planck units are suitable for measuring quantities that are familiar from daily experience. For example:
1 Planck mass is about 22 micrograms;
1 Planck momentum is about 6.5 kgm/s;
1 Planck energy is about 500 kWh;
1 Planck charge is close to 11.7 elementary charges;
1 Planck impedance is close to 30 ohms.

converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
However, most Planck units are many orders of magnitude too large or too small to be of practical use, so that Planck
units as a system are really only relevant to theoretical physics. In fact, 1 Planck unit is often the largest or smallest
value of a physical quantity that makes sense according to our current understanding. For example:
A speed of 1 Planck length per Planck time is the speed of light in a vacuum, the maximum possible physical speed
in special relativity;[24] 1 nano-(Planck length per Planck time) is about 1.079 km/h.
Our understanding of the Big Bang begins with the Planck epoch, when the universe was 1 Planck time old and 1
Planck length in diameter, and had a Planck temperature of 1. At that moment, quantum theory as presently
understood becomes applicable. Understanding the universe when it was less than 1 Planck time old requires a
theory of quantum gravity that would incorporate quantum effects into general relativity. Such a theory does not yet
exist.

History [ edit ]
Natural units began in 1881, when George Johnstone Stoney, noting that electric charge is quantized, derived units of
length, time, and mass, now named Stoney units in his honor, by normalizing G, c, and the electron charge, e, to 1.[25]
In 1898, Max Planck discovered that action is quantized, and published the result in a paper presented to the Prussian
Academy of Sciences in May 1899.[26][27] At the end of the paper, Planck introduced, as a consequence of his
discovery, the base units later named in his honor. The Planck units are based on the quantum of action, now usually
known as Planck's constant. Planck called the constant b in his paper, though h is now common. Planck underlined the
universality of the new unit system, writing:

...ihre Bedeutung fr alle Zeiten und fr alle, auch auerirdische und auermenschliche Kulturen
notwendig behalten und welche daher als natrliche Maeinheiten bezeichnet werden knnen...
...These necessarily retain their meaning for all times and for all civilizations, even extraterrestrial and non-
human ones, and can therefore be designated as "natural units"...

Planck considered only the units based on the universal constants G, , c, and k B to arrive at natural units for length,
time, mass, and temperature.[27] Planck did not adopt any electromagnetic units. However, since the non-rationalized
gravitational constant, G, is set to 1, a natural extension of Planck units to a unit of electric charge is to also set the
non-rationalized Coulomb constant, k e, to 1 as well. [28] Another convention is to use the elementary charge as the
basic unit of electric charge in Planck system.[29] Such system is convenient for black hole physics. The two
conventions for unit charge differ by a factor of the square root of the Fine-structure constant. Planck's paper also
gave numerical values for the base units that were close to modern values.

List of physical equations [ edit ]

Physical quantities that have different dimensions (such as time and length) cannot be equated even if they are
numerically equal (1 second is not the same as 1 metre). In theoretical physics, however, this scruple can be set aside,
by a process called nondimensionalization. Table 4 shows how the use of Planck units simplifies many fundamental
equations of physics, because this gives each of the five fundamental constants, and products of them, a simple
numeric value of 1. In the SI form, the units should be accounted for. In the nondimensionalized form, the units, which
are now Planck units, need not be written if their use is understood.

Table 4: How Planck units simplify the key equations of physics

Nondimensionalized
SI form
form
Newton's law of universal gravitation
Einstein field equations in general relativity
Massenergy equivalence in special relativity
Energymomentum relation
Thermal energy per particle per degree of freedom
Boltzmann's entropy formula
Planck-Einstein relation for energy and angular
frequency
Planck's law (surface intensity per unit solid angle per
unit angular frequency) for black body at temperature T.
StefanBoltzmann constant defined

converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
BekensteinHawking black hole entropy[30]
Schrdinger's equation
Hamiltonian form of Schrdinger's equation
Covariant form of the Dirac equation
Coulomb's law

Maxwell's equations

Alternative choices of normalization [ edit ]

As already stated above, Planck units are derived by "normalizing" the numerical values of certain fundamental
constants to 1. These normalizations are neither the only ones possible nor necessarily the best. Moreover, the choice
of what factors to normalize, among the factors appearing in the fundamental equations of physics, is not evident, and
the values of the Planck units are sensitive to this choice.
The factor 4 is ubiquitous in theoretical physics because the surface area of a sphere is 4r2. This, along with the
concept of flux are the basis for the inverse-square law, Gauss's law, and the divergence operator applied to flux
density. For example, gravitational and electrostatic fields produced by point charges have spherical symmetry (Barrow
2002: 21415). The 4r2 appearing in the denominator of Coulomb's law, for example, follows from the flux of an
electrostatic field being distributed uniformly on the surface of a sphere. Likewise for Newton's law of universal
gravitation. (If space had more than three spatial dimensions, the factor 4 would have to be changed according to the
geometry of the sphere in higher dimensions.)
Hence a substantial body of physical theory developed since Planck (1899) suggests normalizing to 1 not G but either
1 1 1
4G (or 8G or 16G). Doing so would introduce a factor of 4 (or 8 or 16 ) into the nondimensionalized form of the
law of universal gravitation, consistent with the modern formulation of Coulomb's law in terms of the vacuum permittivity.
1
In fact, alternative normalizations frequently preserve the factor of 4 in the nondimensionalized form of Coulomb's law
as well, so that the nondimensionalized Maxwell's equations for electromagnetism and gravitoelectromagnetism both
take the same form as those for electromagnetism in SI, which do not have any factors of 4.
There are several possible alternative normalizations.

Gravity [ edit ]
In 1899, Newton's law of universal gravitation was still seen as exact,[citation needed] rather than as a convenient
approximation holding for "small" velocities and masses (the approximate nature of Newton's law was shown following
the development of general relativity in 1915). Hence Planck normalized to 1 the gravitational constant G in Newton's
law. In theories emerging after 1899, G nearly always appears in formulae multiplied by 4 or a small integer multiple
thereof. Hence, a choice to be made when designing a system of natural units is which, if any, instances of 4
appearing in the equations of physics are to be eliminated via the normalization.
Normalizing 4G to 1:
Gauss's law for gravity becomes g = M (rather than g = 4M in Planck units).
The BekensteinHawking formula for the entropy of a black hole in terms of its mass mBH and the area of its
event horizon ABH simplifies to SBH = ABH = (mBH)2, where ABH and mBH are both measured in a slight
modification of reduced Planck units, described below.
The characteristic impedance Z0 of gravitational radiation in free space becomes equal to 1. (It is normally
expressed as 4G)[31]
c
No factors of 4 appear in the gravitoelectromagnetic (GEM) equations, which hold in weak gravitational fields
or locally flat space-time. These equations have the same form as Maxwell's equations (and the Lorentz force
1
equation) of electromagnetism, with mass density replacing charge density, and with 4G replacing 0.
Setting 8G = 1. This would eliminate 8G from the Einstein field equations, EinsteinHilbert action, Friedmann
equations, and the Poisson equation for gravitation. Planck units modified so that 8G = 1 are known as reduced
Planck units, because the Planck mass is divided by 8 . Also, the BekensteinHawking formula for the entropy of
a black hole simplifies to SBH = 2(mBH)2 = 2ABH.
c4
Setting 16G = 1. This would eliminate the constant 16G from the EinsteinHilbert action. The form of the Einstein

converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
 field equations with cosmological constant becomes R g = 12 (Rg T).

Electromagnetism [ edit ]
1
Planck units normalize to 1 the Coulomb force constant 4 (as does the cgs system of units). This sets the Planck
0
Z0
impedance, ZP equal to 4 , where Z0 is the characteristic impedance of free space.
Normalizing the permittivity of free space 0 to 1:
Sets the permeability of free space 0 = 1 (because c = 1).
Sets the unit impedance or unit resistance to the characteristic impedance of free space, ZP = Z0 (or sets the
characteristic impedance of free space Z0 to 1).
Eliminates 4 from the nondimensionalized form of Maxwell's equations.
Eliminates 0 from the nondimensionalized form of Coulomb's law, but has 4r2 remaining in the denominator
(which is the surface area of the enclosing sphere at radius r).

Temperature [ edit ]
Planck normalized to 1 the Boltzmann constant k B.
Normalizing 12 k B to 1:
Removes the factor of 12 in the nondimensionalized equation for the thermal energy per particle per degree of
freedom.
Introduces a factor of 2 into the nondimensionalized form of Boltzmann's entropy formula.
Does not affect the value of any base or derived Planck unit other than the Planck temperature, which it
doubles.

Planck units and the invariant scaling of nature [ edit ]

Some theorists (such as Dirac and Milne) have proposed cosmologies that conjecture that physical "constants" might
actually change over time (e.g. a variable speed of light or Dirac varying-G theory). Such cosmologies have not gained
mainstream acceptance and yet there is still considerable scientific interest in the possibility that physical "constants"
might change, although such propositions introduce difficult questions. Perhaps the first question to address is: How
would such a change make a noticeable operational difference in physical measurement or, more fundamentally, our
perception of reality? If some particular physical constant had changed, how would we notice it, how would physical
reality be different? Which changed constants result in a meaningful and measurable difference in physical reality? If a
physical constant that is not dimensionless, such as the speed of light, did in fact change, would we be able to notice it
or measure it unambiguously? a question examined by Michael Duff in his paper "Comment on time-variation of
fundamental constants".[32]
George Gamow argued in his book Mr Tompkins in Wonderland that a sufficient change in a dimensionful physical
constant, such as the speed of light in a vacuum, would result in obvious perceptible changes. But this idea is
challenged:

[An] important lesson we learn from the way that pure numbers like define the world is what it really
means for worlds to be different. The pure number we call the fine structure constant and denote by is a
combination of the electron charge, e, the speed of light, c, and Planck's constant, h. At first we might be
tempted to think that a world in which the speed of light was slower would be a different world. But this
would be a mistake. If c, h, and e were all changed so that the values they have in metric (or any other)
units were different when we looked them up in our tables of physical constants, but the value of
remained the same, this new world would be observationally indistinguishable from our world. The only
thing that counts in the definition of worlds are the values of the dimensionless constants of Nature. If all
masses were doubled in value [including the Planck mass mP ] you cannot tell because all the pure
numbers defined by the ratios of any pair of masses are unchanged.
Barrow 2002[17]

Referring to Duff's "Comment on time-variation of fundamental constants"[32] and Duff, Okun, and Veneziano's paper
"Trialogue on the number of fundamental constants",[33] particularly the section entitled "The operationally
indistinguishable world of Mr. Tompkins", if all physical quantities (masses and other properties of particles) were
expressed in terms of Planck units, those quantities would be dimensionless numbers (mass divided by the Planck
mass, length divided by the Planck length, etc.) and the only quantities that we ultimately measure in physical
experiments or in our perception of reality are dimensionless numbers. When one commonly measures a length with a
ruler or tape-measure, that person is actually counting tick marks on a given standard or is measuring the length

converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
relative to that given standard, which is a dimensionless value. It is no different for physical experiments, as all physical
quantities are measured relative to some other like-dimensioned quantity.
We can notice a difference if some dimensionless physical quantity such as fine-structure constant, , changes or the
m
proton-to-electron mass ratio, mp , changes (atomic structures would change) but if all dimensionless physical
e
quantities remained unchanged (this includes all possible ratios of identically dimensioned physical quantity), we can
not tell if a dimensionful quantity, such as the speed of light, c, has changed. And, indeed, the Tompkins concept
becomes meaningless in our perception of reality if a dimensional quantity such as c has changed, even drastically.
If the speed of light c, were somehow suddenly cut in half and changed to 12 c (but with the axiom that all dimensionless
physical quantities remain the same), then the Planck length would increase by a factor of 22 from the point of view of
some unaffected observer on the outside.[citation needed] Measured by "mortal" observers in terms of Planck units, the
new speed of light would remain as 1 new Planck length per 1 new Planck time which is no different from the old
measurement. But, since by axiom, the size of atoms (approximately the Bohr radius) are related to the Planck length
by an unchanging dimensionless constant of proportionality:

Then atoms would be bigger (in one dimension) by 22, each of us would be taller by 22, and so would our metre
sticks be taller (and wider and thicker) by a factor of 22. Our perception of distance and lengths relative to the Planck
length is, by axiom, an unchanging dimensionless constant.
Our clocks would tick slower by a factor of 42 (from the point of view of this unaffected observer on the outside)
because the Planck time has increased by 42 but we would not know the difference (our perception of durations of
time relative to the Planck time is, by axiom, an unchanging dimensionless constant). This hypothetical unaffected
observer on the outside might observe that light now propagates at half the speed that it previously did (as well as all
other observed velocities) but it would still travel 299 792 458 of our new metres in the time elapsed by one of our new
seconds ( 12 c 42 22 continues to equal 299 792 458 m/s). We would not notice any difference.
This contradicts what George Gamow writes in his book Mr. Tompkins; there, Gamow suggests that if a dimension-
dependent universal constant such as c changed significantly, we would easily notice the difference. The disagreement
is better thought of as the ambiguity in the phrase "changing a physical constant"; what would happen depends on
whether (1) all other dimensionless constants were kept the same, or whether (2) all other dimension-dependent
constants are kept the same. The second choice is a somewhat confusing possibility, since most of our units of
measurement are defined in relation to the outcomes of physical experiments, and the experimental results depend on
the constants. (The only exception is the kilogram.) Gamow does not address this subtlety; the thought experiments he
conducts in his popular works assume the second choice for "changing a physical constant". And Duff or Barrow would
point out that ascribing a change in measurable reality, i.e. , to a specific dimensional component quantity, such as c,
is unjustified. The very same operational difference in measurement or perceived reality could just as well be caused
by a change in h or e if is changed and no other dimensionless constants are changed. It is only the dimensionless
physical constants that ultimately matter in the definition of worlds.[32][34]
This unvarying aspect of the Planck-relative scale, or that of any other system of natural units, leads many theorists to
conclude that a hypothetical change in dimensionful physical constants can only be manifest as a change in
dimensionless physical constants. One such dimensionless physical constant is the fine-structure constant. There are
some experimental physicists who assert they have in fact measured a change in the fine structure constant[35] and this
has intensified the debate about the measurement of physical constants. According to some theorists[36] there are
some very special circumstances in which changes in the fine-structure constant can be measured as a change in
dimensionful physical constants. Others however reject the possibility of measuring a change in dimensionful physical
constants under any circumstance.[32] The difficulty or even the impossibility of measuring changes in dimensionful
physical constants has led some theorists to debate with each other whether or not a dimensionful physical constant
has any practical significance at all and that in turn leads to questions about which dimensionful physical constants are
meaningful.[33]

See also [ edit ]

cGh physics
Dimensional analysis
Doubly special relativity
Planck era
Planck particle
Planck scale
Planck time
Zero-point energy

converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
Notes [ edit ]
1. ^ Wesson, P. S. (1980). "The application of dimensional analysis to cosmology" . Space Science Reviews. 27 (2): 117.
Bibcode:1980SSRv...27..109W . doi:10.1007/bf00212237 .
2. ^ a b c Fundamental Physical Constants from NIST
3. ^ "CODATA Value: Newtonian constant of gravitation" . The NIST Reference on Constants, Units, and Uncertainty. US
National Institute of Standards and Technology. June 2015. Retrieved 2015-09-25. "2014 CODATA recommended values"
4. ^ "CODATA Value: Planck constant over 2 pi" . The NIST Reference on Constants, Units, and Uncertainty. US National
Institute of Standards and Technology. June 2015. Retrieved 2015-09-25. "2014 CODATA recommended values"
5. ^ "CODATA Value: Boltzmann constant" . The NIST Reference on Constants, Units, and Uncertainty. US National
Institute of Standards and Technology. June 2015. Retrieved 2015-09-25. "2014 CODATA recommended values"
6. ^ CODATA Planck length
7. ^ CODATA Planck mass
8. ^ CODATA Planck time
9. ^ CODATA electric constant
10. ^ CODATA Planck constant over 2 pi
11. ^ CODATA speed of light in vacuum
12. ^ CODATA Planck temperature
13. ^ Michael W. Busch, Rachel M. Reddick (2010) "Testing SETI Message Designs, " Astrobiology Science Conference
2010 , April 2629, 2010, League City, Texas.
14. ^ June 2001 Physics Today
15. ^ Staff. "Birth of the Universe" . University of Oregon. Retrieved September 24, 2016. - discusses "Planck time" and
"Planck era" at the very beginning of the Universe
16. ^ Edward W. Kolb; Michael S. Turner (1994). The Early Universe . Basic Books. p. 447. ISBN 978-0-201-62674-2.
Retrieved 10 April 2010.
17. ^ a b John D. Barrow, 2002. The Constants of Nature; From Alpha to Omega The Numbers that Encode the Deepest
Secrets of the Universe. Pantheon Books. ISBN 0-375-42221-8.
18. ^ Barrow, John D.; Tipler, Frank J. (1988). The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-
282147-8. LCCN 87028148 .
19. ^ P.A.M. Dirac (1938). "A New Basis for Cosmology". Proceedings of the Royal Society A. 165 (921): 199208.
Bibcode:1938RSPSA.165..199D . doi:10.1098/rspa.1938.0053 .
20. ^ J.D. Barrow and F.J. Tipler, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle, Oxford UP, Oxford (1986), chapter 6.9.
21. ^ Barrow, John D.; Shaw, Douglas J. (2011). "The value of the cosmological constant". General Relativity and Gravitation.
43 (10): 25552560. arXiv:1105.3105 . doi:10.1007/s10714-011-1199-1 .
22. ^ [Theory of Quantized Space Date of registration 21/9/1994 N. 344146 protocol 4646 Presidency of the Council of
Ministers Italy Dep. Information and Publishing, literary, artistic and scientific property]
23. ^ Electromagnetic Unification Electronic Conception of the Space, the Energy and the Matter
24. ^ Feynman, R. P.; Leighton, R. B.; Sands, M. (1963). "The Special Theory of Relativity". The Feynman Lectures on
Physics. 1 "Mainly mechanics, radiation, and heat". Addison-Wesley. pp. 159. ISBN 0-7382-0008-5. LCCN 63020717 .
25. ^ John Barrow, The Constants of Nature: The Numbers That Encode the Deepest Secrets of the Universe, 2003, chapter 1
26. ^ Planck (1899), p. 479.
27. ^ a b *Tomilin, K. A., 1999, "Natural Systems of Units: To the Centenary Anniversary of the Planck System ", 287296.
28. ^ Pavic, Matej (2001). The Landscape of Theoretical Physics: A Global View . Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. pp. 347
352. ISBN 0-7923-7006-6. http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0610061
29. ^ Tomilin, K. (1999). "Fine-structure constant and dimension analysis". Eur. J. Phys. 20 (5): L39L40.
Bibcode:1999EJPh...20L..39T . doi:10.1088/0143-0807/20/5/404 .
30. ^ Also see Roger Penrose (1989) The Road to Reality. Oxford Univ. Press: 714-17. Knopf.
31. ^ General relativity predicts that gravitational radiation propagates at the same speed as electromagnetic radiation.
32. ^ a b c d Michael Duff (2002). "Comment on time-variation of fundamental constants". arXiv:hep-th/0208093 .
33. ^ a b Duff, Michael; Okun, Lev; Veneziano, Gabriele (2002). "Trialogue on the number of fundamental constants". Journal of
High Energy Physics. 3 (3): 023. arXiv:physics/0110060 . Bibcode:2002JHEP...03..023D . doi:10.1088/1126-
6708/2002/03/023 .
34. ^ John BaezHow Many Fundamental Constants Are There?
35. ^ Webb, J. K.; et al. (1999). "Further evidence for cosmological evolution of the fine structure constant". Phys. Rev. Lett.
87 (9): 884. arXiv:astro-ph/0012539v3 . Bibcode:2001PhRvL..87i1301W . doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.091301 .
PMID 11531558 .
36. ^ Davies, Paul C.; Davis, T. M.; Lineweaver, C. H. (2002). "Cosmology: Black Holes Constrain Varying Constants". Nature.
418 (6898): 6023. Bibcode:2002Natur.418..602D . doi:10.1038/418602a . PMID 12167848 .

converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
 References [ edit ]
Barrow, John D. (2002). The Constants of Nature; From Alpha to Omega The Numbers that Encode the Deepest
Secrets of the Universe. New York: Pantheon Books. ISBN 0-375-42221-8. Easier.
Barrow, John D.; Tipler, Frank J. (1986). The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Oxford: Claredon Press. ISBN 0-19-
851949-4. Harder.
Penrose, Roger (2005). The Road to Reality. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Section 31.1. ISBN 0-679-45443-8.
Planck, Max (1899). "ber irreversible Strahlungsvorgnge" . Sitzungsberichte der Kniglich Preuischen
Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin. 5: 440480. pp. 47880 contain the first appearance of the Planck base
units other than the Planck charge, and of Planck's constant, which Planck denoted by b. a and f in this paper
correspond to k and G in this entry.
Tomilin, K. A. (1999). "Natural Systems of Units: To the Centenary Anniversary of the Planck System" (PDF).
Proceedings Of The XXII Workshop On High Energy Physics And Field Theory: 287296.

External links [ edit ]

Value of the fundamental constants , including the Planck base units, as reported by the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST).
Sections C-E of collection of resources bear on Planck units. As of 2011, those pages had been removed from
the planck.org web site. Use the Wayback Machine to access pre-2011 versions of the website. Good discussion
of why 8G should be normalized to 1 when doing general relativity and quantum gravity. Many links.
The universe and the parameters that describe it in Planck units Pulls together various physics concepts into one
unifying picture.
"Planck Era" and "Planck Time" (up to 1043 seconds after birth of Universe) (University of Oregon).
Constants of nature: Quantum Space Theory offers a different set of Planck units and defines 31 physical
constants in terms of them.

v t e Planck's natural units [show]

v t e Systems of measurement [show]

Physics portal Science portal

Categories: Max Planck Natural units

This page was last modified on 1 March 2017, at 06:25.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use
and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers Contact Wikipedia Developers Cookie statement Mobile view

converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com