Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
Is the phrase "States of matter" a misnomer?
A "state of matter" describes the configuration/structure of atoms and molecules in an object, correct? It would not make sense to describe a single atom (which is considered matter?) as a solid/liquid/gas/etc.
Wouldn't "States of molecules" be more accurate?
The key point here is that in the traditional sense, "states of matter" refers to solid, liquid, gaseous, or plasma states- that is, it assumes a large number of atoms or molecules, yielding a macroscopic ensemble of them.
Now, how big is "large"? Note that a solid cluster of gold atoms consisting of ~tens to hundreds of atoms will exhibit some types of quantum behavior that a cluster of ~billions of gold atoms will not. Note also that a liquid cluster of water molecules consisting of ~tens of molecules will not have a well-defined surface energy, something that a cubic centimeter of water in a test tube will definitely possess.
This means that "large" means "macroscopic".
