Physics question

[Kalashnikov]

Maybe someone with college-level physics education could answer a question that's been bothering me for a while.

In basic chemistry and physics courses that I've taken in high school, we were taught about the basic "building blocks of matter" (electron, neutron and proton) and how they interact with eachother etc.

Can anyone tell me if modern physics describes matter as infinitely divisible? For example when two atoms collide, how is it possible for them to touch? My instinct tells me to think of them as two billiard balls colliding except that if you were to watch this happen you would know that there were smaller particles which were actually causing the effects of the two bodies bouncing off eachother.

So can physicists tell whether or not matter can be divided an infinite amount of times?

Any responses would be appreciated.

 

[drrman]

well bro, atoms make up matter and protons, neutrons, electrons, quarks, and other things make p the atom. There is a "smallest" divisible piece which is the quark and or the nucleons if im not mistaken.

 

[Longhorn85]

So can physicists tell whether or not matter can be divided an infinite amount of times?

Any responses would be appreciated.

I remember that the first law of thermodynamics is that matter can neither be created nor destroyed. Therefore matter cannot be divided an infinite number of times.

A tremendous amount of energy is required to split an atom (fusion) or combine two (fission).

I don't remember too much more than that from Physics.

 

[Longhorn85]

Re: Re: Physics question

split an atom (fusion) or combine two (fission).

Or is it the other way around?

 

[Kalashnikov]

ttlpkg: If matter were able to be divided infinitely this would not mean that this matter is being destroyed. Maybe I misunderstood you?

 

[Longhorn85]

ttlpkg: If matter were able to be divided infinitely this would not mean that this matter is being destroyed. Maybe I misunderstood you?

It seems that if it could be divided an infinite number of times then it would be virtually destroyed.

 

[Kalashnikov]

bump

 

[MrMakaveli]

DRRman well bro, atoms make up matter and protons, neutrons, electrons, quarks, and other things make p the atom. There is a "smallest" divisible piece which is the quark and or the nucleons if im not mistaken.

From what I remember, thats correct (Its been 2 months since I took A.P Physics and I didnt do extremely well so I might be wrong too)

About the matter thing, I belive new data has proven matter can be "destroyed" under very specific conditions. I remember we spent 3 or 4 days talking about this and anti-matter. If anyone else knows more about exactly how matter is destroyed let me know.

 

[aurelius]

From what I remember, thats correct (Its been 2 months since I took A.P Physics and I didnt do extremely well so I might be wrong too)

About the matter thing, I belive new data has proven matter can be "destroyed" under very specific conditions. I remember we spent 3 or 4 days talking about this and anti-matter. If anyone else knows more about exactly how matter is destroyed let me know.

I know that in theoretical physics anti matter when it comes in contact with matter will anihlate it.

 

[WODIN]

Atoms, Neutrons and Protons go BOOM! into those cute little things called Quarks, there are Bluons, Neuons, and Charms in the quark family based on spin and how much the laugh when you tickle them. After that you get into the really fun stuff about string theory.

http://superstringtheory.com/

 

[danielson]

ummm, i was taught fundemantal particles as different types of quarks, but i believe they have found constituent parts to the quarks as well (or at least i think the have) so there are maybe smaller particles than quarks. at present these are the indivisable parts so u theoretically cant divide further than them. however they said that about protons a long time ago

i 'think' (i cant 100% remember as i aint done this in a while) that the first law of thermodynamics refers to energy not being able to be created or destroyed only changed in form.

so matter can be annihilate (destroyed) if it collides with anti matter.....also there is a loss in mass (nuclear loss in mass) in a fission reaction with the A-bomb so matter has been destroyed.....its been converted to energy. i find it much easier think of matter as another form of energy....it might not be correct in the physics sense, but it makes things much easier to understand when you have matter and anit matter colliding, then nothing is annihilated uits only conserved. it also works as a model for stuff like neutrino production in beta decay as well

 

[Y_lifter]

I like to Scrub in the tub with quantum foam

 

[HappyScrappy]

Re: Re: Re: Physics question

Or is it the other way around?

yeah - other way around - fusion is putting shit together, fission is tearing it apart.

 

[Prometheus]

i find it much easier think of matter as another form of energy....it might not be correct in the physics sense, but it makes things much easier to understand when you have matter and anit matter colliding, then nothing is annihilated uits only conserved. it also works as a model for stuff like neutrino production in beta decay as well

You're right, matter is a form of energy. Matter is not destroyed - it is only converted in form. That's one of the teachings of Einstein's most famous equation, i.e., that matter and energy are interchangeable.

I have never heard of consitituents of quarks - afaik, they are the accepted lowest-level units. for now, anyway.

 

[Blue Sky]

matter is not infinitely divisible... protons and neutrons are composed of more fundamental particles (quarks), but electrons are a fundamental particle in itself and cannot be subdivided into anything smaller, as is a photon (as for electrons they have mass, but don't have any spatial exent.. they are 0-dimensional objects).

as for the conservation of mass... the more general law is the law of conservation of energy. Mass is nothing but localized energy, (yes that famous Einstein equ e=mc^2)... So when a matter and antimatter collides their mass is converted to energy and from the collision site gamma rays are emitted. Conversely, if you have a spatial vacuum but with intense electric/magnetic/gravitational fields a electron-positron pair can spontaneously emerge out of thin air (that is how black holes evaporate)...

 

[Kalashnikov]

Blue Sky: why stop at quarks? I have been reading one of Stephen Hawkings books where he discusses current research in physics and the limit to the series of smaller and smaller length scales.

He states that the smallest object possible in a four dimensional universe is called the Planck length, however he also says that spacetime could be ten or eleven dimensional, which would make smaller units possible.

This is all theoretical but for some reason it doesn't make sense to me that a unit of matter would exist that could not be further broken down.

As for photons, with today's methods of measurement, they only have mass when in "motion"; they have no rest mass. I'm not sure what this implies in this argument but it's still interesting.

 

[Nathan]

Quarks are the smallest units of matter science can currently detect but I'msure they'll ffind smaller and smaller particles as we go.

Matter and energy are the same so to speak of conservation of matter is really the same as conservation of energy, which holds when discussing the entire universe. Actually, it is theorized in the inflationary scenario of the creation of the universe that there was a brief break in conservation of energy in the early universe that lead ultimately to an imbalance in particles and their anti-particle counterparts.

If you believe in quantum mechanics though, it would suggest that there should exist some finite bundle of matter that cannot be further subdivided. To say though that quarks are that limit is not necessarily accurate.

 

[Blue Sky]

Nn.. apparently spacetime in the current theoretical framework consists of 11 dimensions (6 of which are real and 5 imaginary dimensions? maybe the other way around..) And they do postulate something called Planck length and Planck time, where neither space nor time is continuous but... grainy...

And... as Nathan says if you believe in the quantum theory... there must be a fundamental unit of mass... It is thought that the Higg's Bosons are the particles that endow matter w/ mass... and they are discrete particles so there is an unit of mass that cannot be subdivided...

As for photons they never have mass... they only have momentum... they are massless...

 

[Fonz]

Maybe someone with college-level physics education could answer a question that's been bothering me for a while.

In basic chemistry and physics courses that I've taken in high school, we were taught about the basic "building blocks of matter" (electron, neutron and proton) and how they interact with eachother etc.

Can anyone tell me if modern physics describes matter as infinitely divisible? For example when two atoms collide, how is it possible for them to touch? My instinct tells me to think of them as two billiard balls colliding except that if you were to watch this happen you would know that there were smaller particles which were actually causing the effects of the two bodies bouncing off eachother.

So can physicists tell whether or not matter can be divided an infinite amount of times?

Any responses would be appreciated.

Oh yes, theoretical physics.

One could in theory use a linear accelerator travelling at close to v>>c, using a INCREDIBLY precise magnetic field to throw 1
neutrino and 1 ANTI-neutrino together at speeds
approaching 2c.

Remember that ones speed is <<c and ones is -<<c
(They are going AT each other)

In essence, the anti-matter would DESTROY the matter and
vice-versa.

The net result would be an INCREDIBLE release of energy.

This is actually the only possible reaction that would yield
a 100% matter-energy conversion.

Fonz

 

[aurelius]

my head hurts...

 

[Kalashnikov]

Re: Re: Physics question

This is actually the only possible reaction that would yield
a 100% matter-energy conversion.

Fonz

But if one thinks of matter and energy as the same thing as someone stated above, then the matter would not be destroyed; it would simply change form.

 

[Lestat]

how did samote miss this one?

 

[samoth]

how did samote miss this one?

LOL! I don't remember this thread.

I remember Prometheus, though. He was... cool. (must... avoid... using cliche g**d b*o... )

 

[Lestat]

LOL! I don't remember this thread.

I remember Prometheus, though. He was... cool. (must... avoid... using cliche g**d b*o... )

don't every be ashamed of recognizing a good bro