Right, by my point is that your accuracy and precision are the same whether you are making a 1 meter length object or a π meter length object. Your meter stick is not accurate to the width of a hydrogen atom, either.

But if we accept the precision of our manufacturing capabilities as "close enough," then it is equally as close to exactly π as it is to exactly 1.

In other words, to say we cannot make an object that is π meters is to say we cannot make an object that is any specific length.

Sure. But how about a plank length instead of width of H atom. That would be great.

Planck length isn’t the smallest possible distance. It’s simply the smallest distance at which our current understanding of physics still holds up. Beyond that, our current models break down, but our current models are very incomplete

Mmmmmm don’t know about that.

The Planck length is the minimum resolvable accuracy of the universe. That doesn’t mean it’s a building block like the electron is.

I believe you're mistaken. A Planck length is the minimum length we can extrapolate down before physics gets weird, but that doesn't mean it is the smallest possible length anything can be.

And an irrational number does exist as a discrete unit, it simply cannot be described as a fraction. Case in point, if you could create a spherical particle that was exactly 1 Planck length across, it would have a circumference of exactly π Planck lengths.

By your logic, such a theoretical particle could not exist because the circumference includes an irrational number in the size of the body.

Complex numbers, and a bunch more things too

Let's have a look.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrational_number

In mathematics, the irrational numbers (in- + rational) are all the real numbers that are not rational numbers. That is, irrational numbers cannot be expressed as the ratio of two integers. When the ratio of lengths of two line segments is an irrational number, the line segments are also described as being incommensurable, meaning that they share no "measure" in common, that is, there is no length ("the measure"), no matter how short, that could be used to express the lengths of both of the two given segments as integer multiples of itself.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics

Quantum systems have bound states that are quantized to discrete values of energy, momentum, angular momentum, and other quantities, in contrast to classical systems where these quantities can be measured continuously.

The conclusion is wrong, i agree. That's the joke of the meme.

(Keep down voting if it matters to you. I'm only trying to explain a joke. The top post is in agreement with my statement.)

The meme wasn't about imaginary numbers, but irrational numbers like pi or the swuare root of 3. Mathematicaly, those numbers have mever ending decimals that never repeat. But quantum mechanics doesn't allow for any measurements smaller/more precise than the planck scale. The quantum nature of the universe means that no object in the universe can have an irrational length.

An easy way to picture this is a right triangle. I can make said triangle with two sides that are exactly 1 meter long, all the way down to the planck length. The hypotenuse is theoretically exactly the square root of 2 meteres long, but that is impossible because part of that triangle would have to exist beyond the quantum realm.