I am thinking that there must be some upper limit beyond which the nuclear forces which hold atoms and molecules together would begin to fail. In other words, how fast does something have to vibrate to shatter at the molecular or atomic level? If you can give an answer in term of hertz (hZ) that would be fine, or explain any misconceptions I have in my question. Does this possiblly cross over into 'hyperstring' theory?
2006-07-26 15:07:13 · 8 answers · asked by But why is the rum always gone? 6 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Physics
Please, no vibrator jokes, ok?
2006-07-26 15:07:33 · update #1
This is actually a very interesting question, but I think you're somewhat confused in the terminology.
Matter, if you define it to be some conglomeration of molecules, then has a upper frequency of vibration. It would be the melting point for solids and the vaporization point for liquids. These are phase transitions.
After this you have some transition effects, like ionization, which is when the electron vibrates so fast that it flies right off the nucleus. This creates as state of ionized gas that's usually referred to as plasma.
Now, you're talking about how fast can protons and neutrons vibrate before the nucleus breaks down? Well, that would be the "vibrational" energy required to overcome the nuclear binding force. Now, vibration at this level of matter is *very* poorly defined, and you're really talking about breaking the bonds between nucleons rather than making that vibrate faster and faster. This is essentially what fission is. After that, you're talking about quarks, and there isn't an analogy apt enough to really answer that question in terms of what you're going for.
Hope this helps, feel free to ask more questions if you need more clarification.
2006-07-26 15:29:51 · answer #1 · answered by kain2396 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It looks like the highest frequency know is 10^22 HZ
2006-07-26 22:26:50 · answer #2 · answered by DoctaB01 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably the speed of light divided by the Planck length:
c=3x10^8 meters/sec
lp=1.6x10^-35 meter
=> fmax=1.9x10^43 Hz
2006-07-27 00:11:32 · answer #3 · answered by Mark V 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think Mark V is on the right track. The highest frequency possible would correspond to a wavelength equal to the Planck distance. (That frequency would be the inverse of the Planck time.)
2006-07-27 00:18:30 · answer #4 · answered by R[̲̅ə̲̅٨̲̅٥̲̅٦̲̅]ution 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Good to have you ask this here. I suggest google or the library. You can find better answers on your own to such academic concerns and technical questions in this way. Good luck. www.teoma.com or www.dogpile.com are good. Or even define: "and your term here: in Google
2006-07-26 22:34:44 · answer #5 · answered by Ouros 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Excellent answer by KAIN 2396.
2006-07-26 22:35:33 · answer #6 · answered by Pearlsawme 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
369 hz.
2006-07-26 22:24:37 · answer #7 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Kain is on to sumthin
2006-07-26 23:37:40 · answer #8 · answered by Richard 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋