Timeline for Finding the mass of pure matter [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 9, 2014 at 19:45 | comment | added | Mark Mitchison | Just in case it helps to clarify, my reading of this question is the following. Trace perhaps you could confirm if this is correct. Are you assuming that the different elementary particles (e.g. electrons or protons) have different masses because, say, the proton is physically larger than the electron? In which case, the density of "pure matter" $\rho$ would be given by the equation $\rho = \frac{\mathrm{mass\, of\, proton}}{\mathrm{volume\, of\, proton}}$. This idea is at odds with our current understanding of elementary particles, for which this concept of a volume is basically meaningless. | |
| Aug 9, 2014 at 15:32 | history | closed |
ACuriousMind♦ Kyle Kanos BMS Danu user4552 |
Needs details or clarity | |
| Aug 9, 2014 at 15:01 | comment | added | Jim | So this pure matter could be another fundamental particle where the theory predicts a mass but also (for some reason) the theory predicts that the mass must have a set, rather large volume. It would either be the least dense particle in existence or it would be a black hole seed particle or it would be massless and travel at light speed. In either of the first two cases, it is impossible to tell you its mass. | |
| Aug 9, 2014 at 14:41 | comment | added | Phil Frost | I suppose if you ever found this "pure" matter, you would put it on a balance to find its mass. Just like ordinary, "impure" matter. | |
| Aug 9, 2014 at 14:27 | answer | added | AlanZ2223 | timeline score: 0 | |
| Aug 9, 2014 at 13:55 | answer | added | Wouter | timeline score: 3 | |
| Aug 9, 2014 at 13:50 | review | Close votes | |||
| S Aug 9, 2014 at 15:36 | |||||
| Aug 9, 2014 at 13:29 | answer | added | John Rennie | timeline score: 3 | |
| Aug 9, 2014 at 13:28 | review | Low quality answers | |||
| S Aug 9, 2014 at 15:36 | |||||
| Aug 9, 2014 at 13:24 | comment | added | David Hammen | Everything with mass is made up of atomic particles. Your "pure" matter does not exist. | |
| Aug 9, 2014 at 13:13 | comment | added | Trace Fleeman | Anything that takes up space and has mass. I mean, something theoretically not made up of particles. A volume of 1 meter cubed that is completely filled with pure matter - no particles, just matter - would have a mass of what? | |
| Aug 9, 2014 at 13:11 | comment | added | Wouter | What do you mean "not made up of particles"? Let's start here: what is matter to you? | |
| Aug 9, 2014 at 13:08 | comment | added | Trace Fleeman | 1 meter cubed, ach. I mean, matter that isn't made up of particles, there is no space inbetween. "PURE" matter | |
| Aug 9, 2014 at 13:05 | comment | added | Wouter | I'm sorry but I have no idea what you mean. And I'm pretty sure 1 meter squared is a surface. ;-) | |
| Aug 9, 2014 at 12:54 | history | asked | Trace Fleeman | CC BY-SA 3.0 |