Thus spake Oh No
Thus spake "
Parenthetically, the revised Schwarschild radius for the proton is
about 0.8 x 10^-13 cm, which is about equal to the charge radius of the
proton and the revised Planck length.

I should just like to add that the Schwarzschild radius of the proton
is not something which appears in standard physical models, the reason
being that a classical massive point particle is not a consistent idea
in general relativity. In fact a proton must be treated quantum
mechanically, and we do not have an accepted theory on that, but if the
Schwarzschild radius of the proton were considered then it would have a
magnitude given by

2Gm/c^3 =3D 8.28 x 10 e^-63 m

Planck length also has a formal definition

l_p =3D sqrt(hbar*G/c^3) =3D 1.61605e-35 =B1 1.0e-39 m

Neither of these figures is open to revision beyond that allowed by
experimental margins of error. If you are defining other quantities, you
should give them other names.

With apologies, I copy pasted those figures from another source. The
equations looked all right when I posted, but obviously they did not
contain pure ASCII and they appear to have been corrupted by one of the
gateways used by s.a.r. = has come out as =3D and +- has come out as
=B1. They should read

Schwarzschild radius of the proton

2Gm/c^3 = 8.28 x 10 e^-63 m

Planck length

l_p = sqrt(hbar*G/c^3) = 1.61605e-35 +- 1.0e-39 m



Regards

--
Charles Francis
substitute charles for NotI to email