What the HECK are Planck Units?
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 05. 2024
- Back in 1900 CE, Max Planck invented a natural system of units that he hopes would be the most universal. How universal are they? What does it mean for them to be "natural"? How are they defined? Why are they used? These are all questions answered in this video.
________________________________
VIDEO ANNOTATIONS
What If You Fell Into A Black Hole?
• What If You Fell Into ...
Is the Universe a Simulation?
• Is the WHOLE Universe ...
Faking Gravity in a Spaceship:
• Faking Gravity in a Sp...
________________________________
SCIENCE ASYLUM STUFF
Support us on Patreon:
/ scienceasylum
Advanced Theoretical Physics (eBook):
gumroad.com/l/ubSc
Merchandise:
shop.spreadshirt.com/scienceas...
More videos at:
/ thescienceasylum
Facebook: / scienceasylum
Twitter: @nicklucid / nicklucid
Instagram: @nicklucid / nicklucid
Google+: www.google.com/+Scienceasylum
Main Site: www.scienceasylum.com/
Vlog: / thenicklucid
________________________________
EXTRA INFO LINKS
NASA Big Bang Animation:
• NASA | The Big Bang
Universal Constant Standards:
physics.nist.gov/cuu/Constants...
Planck Units:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_...
Big Bang:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronol...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphic...
Orders of Magnitude:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_...)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_...)
Smallest Measured Distance:
physics.stackexchange.com/ques...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncerta...
More on Black Holes:
math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics...
physics.ucsd.edu/students/cou...
________________________________
LINKS TO COMMENTS
John Sessa - Planck Units:
• Is the WHOLE Universe ...
Amit Patel - Spaghettification:
• What If You Fell Into ...
Kamikaze Katorin - Passage of Time:
• What If You Fell Into ...
DavidCH12345 - Passage of Time:
• What If You Fell Into ...
david21686 - Hawking Radiation:
• What If You Fell Into ...
Johan Hart - Event Horizon:
• What If You Fell Into ...
Your Master - Clone Union:
• What If You Fell Into ...
________________________________
IMAGE CREDITS
Logo designed by: Ben Sharef
Stock Photos and Clipart
- Wikimedia Commons commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mai...
- Openclipart openclipart.org/
- or I made them myself...
Mars Polar Lander:
www.jpl.nasa.gov/pictures/sola...
www.jpl.nasa.gov/imagepolicy/
Anders Angstrom:
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
Max Planck:
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
Human Ovum:
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
Fea:
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
fun fact: my dad worked on the Mars Polar Lander that crashed. it's been like 18 years and hes still pissed about that.
Oh, I bet! I would be too! That was an expensive mistake.
eternal8song A legendary mistake though, do you know if someone was responsible for it? Did that person die of shame?
Vincent Noteboom well, there's one guy who was in charge of proofreading the code whom my dad is pretty sure is to blame, but nothing was ever proven. as far as I know he's still around.
I don't get the connection with Max's Planks ?
The Science Asylum what about Mars Climate Orbiter?
It still boggles my mind this guy has less than 100k subscribers. This content is gold
THen share it on the twitter and the reddits and all the things! :D
ALL THE PLACES!!!!
IT IS UP TO US TO SHARE
Infinity Pool First time seeing his videos and I thought the same thing
He is loud, and obnoxious. That is why.
I've always wondered what would happen to the units of measurement if all universal constants were set to unity, but never spent a single second trying to find out. Now I know. Thank you.
You're welcome :-)
You do a better job than PBS spacetime at explaining sometimes, great content. And a well deserved like!
Thanks!
@@ScienceAsylum Hey nick, I know that's a totally random video, but can you do a video about quantum entanglement plz I want that since your video about the experiment that almost broke physics video
Some videos are high level shit, but for example the playlist about dark Energy was nice. But yeah, he makes it fun and easy to understand.
@Michael Ortiz no brother they also do a great job for us
Feels like The Science Asylum is more easy and fun to understand, but Space Time is harder to understand, as it uses more direct analogies and goes more in depth a lot of the time
"A singularity is just a place where an equation blows up to infinity" 6:02 Thank you for saying that. Thank you.
You're welcome :-)
kinda like when you calculate a number bigger than an integer limit
Sup. I watch a LOT of science/physics videos so I'm pretty familiar with a lot of your content already but I am in love with your style of presentation. This channel is special.
Am I the only one who loves the pedantic clone? 😀✌🏼✌🏼
Nerd Clone is a fan favorite.
The speech impediment seems superfluous and cruel.
I can't stand him when he's touting metric over imperial, but all other times he's awesome.
Nerd Clone fan club!!!! The time is now.
@boson96 Metric by design is for morons. Literature from the 1700's even says so.
You can 100% learn from a scientist who puts John Cena Clips in his videos..
Twice! 😀
Super true
haha this video was too good >.
🤦♂️ I'm always so embarrassed by older videos. Steve Mould recently watched one (and commented) and I was like "Oh no, why did this video have to be my first impression?" At least I know you've seen my newer stuff.
I just rewatched this one and it's not so bad. Several unnecessary jump cuts and I'm talking _way_ to fast, but otherwise not too bad. I've really slowed down over the years, which is a good thing I think.
Channels like up and atom, and science asylum, are among the few reasons the internet is worth keeping around.
We are grateful
@@ScienceAsylum nooo, it’s a really great video! It’s perfect! I love your channel.
I love your channel as well, Up and Atom!
Keep the good content, thanks a lot for these videos.
You're definitely one of the best "science for dummies" youtubers out there.
Shared, liked and subbed.
Your channel is a diamond in the rough man. From the 3 videos I've seen that is, I'm sure the rest must be good though. Liked, and subbed. What I don't get is how you don't have way more subscribers, CZcams should really make sure you get more attention.
Thanks! Working on it...
There are way too many comments like Eric's under many of NIck Lucid's videos. That unfortunately gives the impression that they're fake.
He has good content, delivered in an original fashion. I doubt anyone thinks he has fake accounts set up to praise himself. It sounds a little far fetched to me.
If you like this material I suggest you grab a book and try to understand what's known about quorks.
I can find plenty of material about quarks, nothing about these quorks you speak of though. JK Frankly the vast majority of books one can find at the library on the subject are mostly just history lessons. On the Shoulders of Giants is a great book, and the timeline of scientific discovery is important to understand these concepts. Plus the men, and women of science deserve recognition for their brilliance, and contributions. Every single book written for the general public is half history, and the rest is so dumbed down they are practically unreadable. For a happy medium between this, and actual textbooks, I find websites like physics.stackexchange.com, Quora, and ScienceDirect to be a happy medium to satisfy my curiosity. CZcams has a few channels like this one that are really good as well.
I love this stuff and your doing a much better job explaining things than anyone else, in fact, I can totally understand what you are saying in your videos so much so that I hardly have to rewind at all? lol
I always thought Planck Length/Time/Temperature were the thresholds past which the mathematical formulas in our models start running into errors, like how trying to go faster than light leads to apparently going backwards in time.
with speed of light everything is more or less understood. the formulas just mathematically disallow any mass having object reach the speed of light.
when you take in planck temperature it's just temperature at which system radiates with plank (wave)length. we don't know if it's possible to heat anything past this point, because mathematically at some point by adding heat to the system you will just cool it down via formation of black holes inside it
I like the idea of taking a plank length and multiplying it by 2^x IE a human scale unit is 2^116 PLs or about 1.34 meters and just making more units for different scales
Probably one of the most talented science communicators on CZcams
Nick, I love all of your videos. I have learned so much! Keep it going man and you will be famous soon!
Could you do a video that explains quantum mechanics better?
I have a playlist of quantum videos available, but they're older. They could use a revisit.
i love your videos nick and i hope your channel gets big because it is awesomely funny XD
Thanks! Glad you like it :-)
Very clean and easy to understand as always. Thanks Nick.
2:30 - I literally got hopping mad one time when I was having a discussion with friends who _insisted_ I couldn't set the value of C to 1. I was like, "Yes, I can! C is equal to one lightyear per year! I can do that!"
You can totally do that. Theoretical physicists do it all the time.
@@ScienceAsylum THANK YOU.
Man u r so great, ur videos are so intresting, i hope u get millions of subs soon....good luck crazy:)
you're kind of my hero right now!
love your humor!
The best companion to pbs space time. It defenitley helps to understand the complexity of our insane universe
Haha one day you should do a video on dimensionless units.
Good idea!
I think planck length definitely has more importance than other planck measurements
Hands down one of the best channels on this platform. Let the binging commence!!
I never thought i could be interested in science as much as i look forward to more videos on this channel.It is easier to understand when put in layman's terms.Thanks
You're welcome :-)
If mankind realized that Planck's length was the smallest possible length, they would've based everything upon that basic unit. Since SI now is the current communicated measurement system, everything translates backwards to get that basic unit length. It would be interesting to see how every known measurement translates forward using the Planck's constant as one.
@@Daniel_Bx ah but the bruised egos don't permit space for any time. There's always violence.
I still cant believe your not bigger like Veritasium size but I do like the local community feel I get when watching you videos. I hope you grow to as big as you please.
When you were throwing up all the universal constants on the screen I got reminded of a book I've read. In it they had people from different universes. And the idea for the differences between the universes were slight differences in those universal constants for those universes.
I watch a lot of science videos. You are a top level science explainer. You seem to understand what it is that laymen get stuck on trying to get their arms around this stuff. But you don't oversimplify. In fact, you have explained to me why my oversimple understanding of some of these concepts, such as wave-particle duality and Hawking radiation, was incorrect. A thousand thank you's.
I just have to say your videos don't answer questions so much as make me ask new ones. Spot on....
Nice videos, I watched most of them and watching rest of them
Mate, your videos are awesome!
Thanks!
That John CENA thing....lmao....it killed me.....
CZcams and CZcams comments are golden. As are your videos. Keep on it my man.
i loved the way u explain this
You made physics so interesting.
Very cool explanation. Thank you ;)
Great Show👍, Thank you😆
Planck length is the size of the smallest point that can theoretically measured as we dive into the wave nature of the point if the distance is smaller than than , the wavelength of the point is so huge it's position is uncertain it could be found anywhere in a small area but without any certainty
It's a joy to listen to u.
YOU
NEED
MORE
SUBS!!!
As a mechanic, I will agree with what you have to say about metric versus imperial. When picking out a wrench size, it is infinitely easier to just go one number up or one number down instead of figuring out what the adjacent fraction is.
Who TF thought it would be a good idea to measure things with FRACTIONS?! AAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH
I love your videos!
That was the best description of planck units I've ever seen
Standardized abstract notation of the XYZ plane would require a better description of time as we assign an arbitrary linear function to time based on our perception of the difference between 2 instantaneous events.
What if it occilates at similar or smaller values than planks constant?
I'm of the opinion that Planck units are at the quantum level of space-time and that they are cubes with a small amount of extra L, but not enough to make it a rectangle, if they exist like this then they give the universe it's cubic representation with room to "warp" to the shape of the energy levels inside them that ultimately make up a particle from the Qf's that flow through them. They take on the shape of the wave and when there is constructive interference if the criteria are met Nn of intersecting waves from any plane. The energy gap found in an electron from orbital to orbital, for instance, the electron does not exist in-between orbitals because the interference is de-constructive there. QFT states all of this implicitly. Einstein filled in most of the frame work we use and it is amazingly accurate.
If they have any significance then it will be found by using it as a derivative of metric units where instead of starting with meter as the center point plank is used as the center point and then just plugging it into all length based math to see what breaks
I love how you use Nerd Clone to get your potentially unpopular opinion across ;D genius!
It is funny but I have a hard time understanding what he says sometimes.
Probably because english is not my first language.
nice clock in the background, that would be nice merch.
This guy should really replace most school books. Awesome skills man awesome skills
Were the Speed of light, Vacuum permittivity and Permeability constant derived separately or were they set so that each were related? Hence Vacuum permittivity or Permeability were not found but were derived to be consistent with the speed of light?
They were all discovered independently and then we found out they were related later on.
This video has the most 2016 energy but explains the subject really well
Can you do a video explaining what moles are, and how to use them?
You're awesome!!!
The Planck Length is not necessarily the smallest possible distance that can exist. It's the smallest possible distance that can be theoretically measured. You try to constrain anything to a smaller accuracy and you end up with such a wildly undefined momentum that the range of uncertainty regarding that momentum overlaps the speed of light, which is of course not possible.
some slight variations on the spelling of our old friend Plonk...!?
I like this idea of removing the influence of humans on units. Great video!!
But if we're talking about the potential intuitive scale units of probable aliens, you've got to start by thinking about molecular structures that could support probable forms of life and be organized into complex life forms. This suggests a range of potential scale sizes here, but I submit it's probably a somewhat restricted range - such life forms can't be a many orders of magnitude smaller or larger than humans.
Great vid. What is the Planck unit for brightness though? What is the conversion from “SI brightness unit” to “Planck brightness unit”?
Planck Intensity = 1.38893 x 10^122 W/m^2
Wait, so we can or can't use Planck units with extraterrestrials? So they're based on constants but in reference to Earth units trying to perfectly divide our rotation, etc evenly into circles.. or duples of 12s for even circular divisions?
Hey this was kinda funny without being annoying. Good stuff.
I have a question. Do we have some "uniwersal" way of measuring the time? For example speed of light is constant, so if we measure it in our units and alien units, then we can compare it. And what about time? Do we have something like that? Like can i say my age in units like hydrogen atom hight?
Last I checked, a second was defined as 9,192,631,770 oscillations of the Cesium-133 atom.
Well, Planck units are fashioned in such a way that light travels one length unit in one time unit.
So Planck length and Planck time are automatically tied together by the speed of light (really, it's the speed of spacetime...).
I think you should've mentioned how he came to the planck length on accident to solve the black body radiation problem but otherwise all gold. it's also nice to mention things like colors would be different like the sun wouldn't be yellow if the plank length were different.
If the LHC in 2018 is using 13 TeV at what planck scale is it working on? And how much would it take to get to the absolute limit?
Rough estimate:
E = hc / x = (Planck constant)(speed of light) / (Planck length) = 1 quadrillion times the energy the LHC is currently operating at.
That number boggles the mind. Thank you for the reply.
Lolololllllolololollllllolol thanks ! Great channel. Great quick news and lessons ! Thanks.
If something goes one unit forward. Then one unit to the left. Then one unit back toward it's point of origin. The difference between it's final location and it's initial location will always be less than the unit in question. So if there really is a smallest unit of measurement wouldn't that suggest that at the smallest scale things can only move in six directions? Forward, Backward, Left, Right, Up and Down.
Let's see; Imperial length units are currently defined by the meter; the meter is defined in terms of the distance light travels in a vacuum in a second, the second is defined by oscillations of an ion of caesium...
Yeah, if we could ever precisely measure one; I'd say Planck lengths would be useful. 😀👍
#cenation
I loved this one!
1:49 I thought the Carbon atom was the basis for the Angstrom as a unit of microlength (for measuring the wavelengths of light)
Plz tell me if I'm right, I found plank frequency just by devising c which is (3x10^8m/s) by plank length
I remember doing some stuff in what I called "metaPlanck" units. Which would be planck units scaled to an appropriate power of 10 in order to be usable.
I think something like that would make Metric look outright Imperial by comparison.
You mean like a Tera-Planck-length or something?
The Science Asylum yeah, basically.
Except that we don't really have SI prefixes for such large numbers, unless we wanted to use exa-exa-exa-exa-exa-Planck-length in microbiology.
I figure you would use a different term for the "meta-scale" sizes.
I figure that's a lot better than "the distance traveled by light in 1/299,792,458 seconds". It's so dumbfoundingly arbitrary and just making up stuff to justify existing u its. Like they could have at least locked it into 1/300,000,000 of a second and just had the scientific community readjust.
But I feel like using a unit called some name like a "Pleter" with a value of 10^36 Planck lengths would be much more useful. By keeping it within some highly-composite, low sig-fig, integer multiplier, you can do some impressive math without having to introduce all kinds of arbitrary scalars.
Just like SI vs Imperial. Like, Watts are Joules per Second and can be determined with r*omega*force. With imperial, you ha e some stupid scalar where you have to divide everything by 5252. BTU's are stupid as well. Why not use Joules, the same unit for every other form of energy? Then you can understand how all forms of energy are essentially the same and can be converted. Hell, imagine not using mass at all, but using the resting energy, since we already know that mass and energy are the same. No need for separate units. All these concepts we find strange just come out naturally when you use units based on the laws of physics.
SI still has these arbitrary scalar, but if we used only powers of 10 of Planck units, no arbitrary scalar is needed. It will just give us a value with a power of 10 associated with how it relates to us on the "meta" scale.
Also, is there a term for "meta scale" as I am using it? Trillions of atoms, non-relitavistic speeds, gravity as a moderately noticeable force?
I don't believe there's an official term for what you're talking about since the scientific community isn't interested in switching.
And one important criterion for choosing units of measure that wasn't brought up the video, is a deal-breaker for Planck units -- precision of repeatability.
Because G, the universal gravitational constant, is so imprecisely known, and is wrapped up in almost every Planck unit, none of them can be at all useful for doing [experimental] physics.
Yet! Some day, maybe . . .
Is planck length affected by relativistic length contraction? Or is it like C in that it's the same in all reference frames?
Yes, I believe units should be planc units multiplied by powers of 2 (ideally to other powers of 2 but that's tricky to get usable units that way.
I planc length • 2¹¹⁶ ≈ 1.3m , you can see how going to 128 or down to 64 would make astronomically large or small respectively.)
I'm curious if using natural units shows or points to other natural units arising from ones already measured?
If two particles were entangled and one was thrown into the black hole what would happen to the entanglement will it be broken even without measurement as information is lost once it goes into the black hole or whatever
Question here! I think the LIGO laboratory meassured something smaller than 10 x-18, something like 10 x-23 i think. I need backup!
a question i have about charge, nature has already provided units of charge, either an electron/proton, or more fundamentally a quark. why isn't the smallest quark charge used as the planck unit of charge?
In particle physics, the charge of the proton _is_ used as a fundamental unit of charge. Planck units aren't always fundamental units. Planck units are just units calculated using fundamental constants of nature.
2:03 That is Dirac's constant which is not equal to planck's constant. Actually it is equal to planck's constant divided by 2pi. Your videos are great.
Where I'm from, we call it the "reduced Planck's constant."
It's the same one, it has 2 different names. I also notised that and tried to check if anyone put it in the comment.
Is plank length real or a result of renormalization? Able to prove? For example, if all light is a product of plank length and another factor, then which light rays are those? Gamma rays?
All planck units are 100% arbitrary.
The basic substrate of the universe. A lot of energy is bound into the universe's "resting" state. The lumpiness of the transinfinitely small is potential, is texture, and that texture contains enough energy to satisfy our most demanding estimate of the total energy budget of the universe. The problem is devising equipment to test ideas at that level.
I wish my physics teacher were as talent as you are.thus no one would crazy about the way you explain it.so funny and so eazy to under stand it.
@no one↠every one. Sorry for the typo
So Planck Length specifically might be important. Here's why:
First, the equation E*l=h (using wavelength instead of frequency from E=hf). This means that there's a minimum energy to confine a system to a given length, which is higher the shorter the length.
Second, the Schwarzchild equation tells us that any given energy value has a minimum length, beyond which it will form a black hole.
Taken together, this suggests that there's a smallest measurable length, where the energy required to measure that scale results in a black hole when compressed to that scale. If I remember correctly, that length is the Planck Length, with the energy being the Planck Energy.
Of course, it could also be our physical laws break down before then. But the math so far points to it as significant.
Incidentally, the mass of that black hole is the Planck Mass.
We should use these units.
"Yo, I'm about 18 giga-hydrogen-atoms tall."
I love this thing about science, planck lenght
is the smallest, planck temperature is the highest
And Planck mass the lowest a black hole can get.
Planck pressure is ridiculous
Just curious.
What do you think of a “metric” system based off of Planck measurements, potentially unifying our understanding of integrated space/time units.
Could we describe space and time units that fit together? like a gigaplanck in space equals a gigaplanck in time or something.
Just an idea I’ve been batting around. Could it be feasible?
I just figure a Planck unit is as universal as we could get....
I don't think those units would be very practical for everyday use.
The Science Asylum not at their minuscule scale. But if we translated our units as they were, to equivalent values, because they’re just kinda random increments of information. And yes, we Americans have a hard time letting go of our Imperial system.
But I’m “maaaaybe” posing the question if we could unify our understanding of space and time with space/time measurement units that reflected each other.
Also super thanks for replying.!!!
That's the nice thing about units. We can use whatever units we'd like on whatever scale we'd like, but some choices are better than others. For example, for energy on a normal scale we use joules (J) or kilowatt hours (kWh). On a particle scale, we tend to use electron volts (eV) instead. We can change the unit system to fit the circumstances and we might need to switch again if ever manage to work on Planck scales, but we're _nowhere near_ that kind of probing yet.
The Science Asylum I forgot about charges and “spins”, and shiz... I was just focused on “seemingly two axis’ on a grid” time and space as a thing... but that’s probably just a model of things we can grasp our mental hands around. Or a frame work we use to study phenomena...
Sorry if I sound “a little crazy”. Lol,I’m just a guy that binges CZcams, not anyone with a degree.
So glad those Plancking videos aren't a fad anymore
Where would the Nick's height be on a length line continuum, from Planck's length to the observable diameter of the universe?
There is a paper published in 1964 showing that Planck length is the smallest measurable length. This is because it is the sizes at which focusing enough energy in such a small area would create a black hole.
doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.135.B849
Planck time ends up being the smallest measurable period of time because of the speed of light is one Planck length per Planck time. Planck mass ends up being the amount of mass can we create a Planck length black hole. As a result, if there is a fundamental minimum length and minimum time unit it is most likely Planck length in Planck time.
During the early stages of the big bang, all matter must have been condensed into a region of space far smaller than the schwarzschild radius. Where can I find info about how this matter escapes what should be a black hole?
I have a video for that: czcams.com/video/o3SeqlyQY_k/video.html 🤓
sir nick lucid, can you kindly make a video about planck constant, permittivity & permeability constant?
You have the most pleasant intro
Hey nick!
I didn't get one thing- we still use N, kg, m etc in Planck Units. So, how would the aliens get that?
Like they cant get to know what a planck length is without having the exact same defined length of a meter in terms of other physical quantities, and their metre might come out to be 2x of ours. So, their planck length would be 0.5x of ours. How do they remain invariant?
We'd probably call it something else referring to its properties/significance rather than comparing to other units when trying to get the message across. Like "one unit shorter than which quantum uncertainty makes a precise measurement impossible" instead of "1.6e-35m".
Hey, I use Planck ohms resistors all the time too!
But... The ones I use are 1/4 watt... How Planck is 1/4 watt?
Bad for my sorry English, huggs from Brazil.
1/4 watt is pretty standard for resistors... but "Planck power" is much bigger than that.
Yes yes, pretty standard, but how much bigger would it be? Thank you very much for replying, please, keep making these videos, you're an awesome teacher! I would really like to be in your class.
Wikipedia says it's 1.875 545 956(41) × 10−18 Coulombs, but coulombs stands for charge, not power...
3.62831x10^(52) watts ...SUPER BIG!
***** WOW. This is like... The power of the Universe...
Planck power is, of course, Planck energy divided by Planck time.
And since Planck energy is macroscopic, and Planck time is on the order of 10⁻⁴⁴ s, Planck power has gotta be really HUGE!
If the universe was as small as a proton and there's presumably a ton of particles then wouldn't that force some particles to violate the Pauli Exclusion Principle?
Not necessarily. Position states are continuous, so there's no problem there. Also, when it comes to particle physics, the size of proton is actually quite large.
Very good please go on!
2:20 Alien alternate bases would be interesting. In a way, it is amazing that we humans regularly use so many different base numbering systems. Depending on what we're doing, we may commonly use bases 2/4/5/8/10/12/16/24/32/60/128/360 and irrational base numbering systems like pi for radians. And that list is far from complete.
Does any one know if we commonly use phi or other irrational numbers as a base numbering system for something.
Ancient Sumerians developed base 60 from using the thumb on one hand pointing to one of 12 bones on the other finger bone in the fingers of that same hand to count 1-12 and the other hand representing how many repetitions of 12. 5×12=60. I like base 60 for reasons that it is divisible by so many useful numbers, 2,3,4,5,6,10,12 and is not so big as to be unusable to count.
I would choose base e, for obvious reasons!
OMG - before this video, I thought we couldn't measure length at a greater precision than the Planck length - in reality, we are 17 magnitudes away in experimental precision from ever proving this to be true or false. That's SICK. I wonder if we are any closer with Plack time...
Finally you've used the John Cena meme that I've suggested. Well played, crazy science guy!
how do you measure the height of an atom? Is it just a core height or do you measure the height considering electron cloud?
When we say "atom," we definitely mean to include all the electrons in the cloud. The nucleus alone is EXTREMELY small... even for atomic scales.
Awesome video.
Thanks!