• @Ziglin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    And that they might still move continuously. Which is impossible to prove (see Planck length).

    Edit: Corrected my statement based on the reply

    • @wholookshere
      link
      English
      1
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      That’s not what Planck length is. It’s the minimum resolvable accuracy not measurement. Meaning we can’t prove something was somewhere specific beyond the Planck length. Not that it’s the building size of the universe.

      https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length#:~:text=It is about 1.616255,Planck length per Planck time.

      it is a common misconception that it is the inherent “pixel size” or smallest possible length of the universe.[1] If a length smaller than this is used in any measurement, then it has a chance of being wrong due to quantum uncertainty

      • @Ziglin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        19 days ago

        That is actually good to know, it answers a lot of questions I’ve had about the universe.