A Quantum Quandary

The Planck Constant has long been used in many calculations in quantum physics for the determination of values such as for energy, wavelength, momentum, and frequency. It is among other constants such as mass, length, time, electric charge determined by Max Planck as the smallest value (quantum) that these measures can be. ( For example the formula for the quantum of time is stated as Planck Time equals the square root of the reduced Planck Constant times the Gravitation Constant divided by the Speed of Light raised to the fifth power and equals 5.391 x 10^-44 seconds. This is the 'quantum of time'.) Planck's work in the early 20^th century has been accepted as correct by mainstream science for many decades.

The commonly used reduced Planck Constant is stated as (approximately) 1.054 x 10^-34 Joule.sec. It is described as the 'quantum of action' or the smallest unit which can cause a change in motion. When the SI (mks) unit Joule.sec is converted to S-T(space-time) units it becomes energy t/s times time t and equals t²/s. This is the S-T unit which describes Inertia. and its reciprocal, s/t², describes Acceleration. Acceleration is therefore at its maximum when its reciprocal, inertia, is at the minimum possible to produce an action, which is what a 'quantum' means. The implication is that 1/ 1.054x10^-34 is the maximum possible acceleration and that equals 9.487 x 10³³ N/kg (or m/sec²). The mathematics which point to the existence of unity between inertia and acceleration (refer previous post on Mass, Gravity and Unity) also imply, from the quantum values which are the smallest indivisible quantities, that there are also maximum values whose limits are imposed by their reciprocal minimums.

Quantum theory currently does not allow a value for inertia less than the Planck constant, which based on the foregoing, also defines a maximum acceleration.

The theoretical maximum acceleration provides a theoretical limit to the rate of expansion of the universe. This view may possibly be challenged by science in the future, but for now may be mandated by Planck's work.

As an example of potential problems with Planck measurement, current physics has a problem with inconsistent values for the radius of a proton. The two available methods of measurement give a significantly different result. Both results do, however, agree that the radius of a proton is smaller than the Planck length, which is supposed to be the quantum of distance, yet a particle appears to have a smaller size than the quantum of distance. It is not clear what, if anything is a fundamental, and begs the question 'Why is a proton so small?'