>>11933750yup. I was thinking about extending it to bigger scale, but you can definitely extend it down as well.
That begs the question: what's the smallest addressable location that we know of? I guess one stab at it would be tp specify a fundamental particle that is by a given set of quantum numbers, something like: "the electron that has an UP spin in the so-and-so orbital around a specified carbon atom in the cytosine base of a specific RNA strand in a specified cell of Joe's person's body".
We're not able to say where that electron is at any given time, but we can at least name it because we know it's somewhere.
To go smaller than that you'd need to know something about the structure of an electron. As far as I know, there is no addressable component of an electron in all of physics because it's a fundamental particle.
And I guess the next question is... is that really true, or just the limit of our current theory? And if it's not true, then what is the literal, for-real "address" for which no subaddress exists?
You could, of course, do this to nucleons, which would bring you down to quarks. Also there's gluons, photons, gravitons, and so on.
