Saying anything with mass isn't quite a good definition of matter either. I take a box that's reflective on the inside. It has a certain mass which we both measure. You then close your eyes as I add something to the box. You measure the mass of the box (and its contents) and see it has increased in mass. Has the amount of matter increased? What I added to the box was massless photons.
That depends upon what definition of MATTER you are using. Classic Definition of Matter is defined as any substence or material that is comprised of Atoms. Then you have issues of Plasma and of Radical Protons and Neutrons....and as these are Particles of Mass and not Quanta under a different definition of Matter they would be covered. But our Definitions of Matter and Energy upon a Quantum Mechanics Level are OUTMODED. Matter is ENERGY....Energy is MATTER.....they are one in the same and interchangable as long as you know how to do it. Because I have for many decades been a Team Leader of the Best and Brightest Members of the U.S. Military and sometimes British SAS....I have on occasion had to be informed or Placed in the Loop due to NEED TO KNOW. Because of a particular JOB....my NEED TO KNOW....allowed me to....KNOW...more than I ever bargained for although I had always suspected....and I wish I NEVER KNEW!!! Because of this I can state this......in the TV and MOVIES of STAR TREK...they used Matter/Antimatter Reactions in order to generate the necessary ENERGY to REPRESENT MASS....as just as I stated....Matter and Energy are really one in the same....and as this massive amount of Energy was generated via this Matter/Antimatter Reaction this Energy represented MASS....and thus such an enormous amount of Mass would WARP SPACE-TIME to the point that the ENTERPRISE would travel in a WARP SPACE-TIME BUBBLE which allowed the TV and MOVIE show Spacecraft to be able to easily travel the INCREDIBLY LONG DISTANCES BETWEEN STARS....by not traveling in normal Space-Time. HERE IS THE PROBLEM WITH THIS......it is estimated there is not enough ANTIMATTER EXISTING IN THE GALAXY....to be mixed with MATTER to create the necessary Matter/Antimatter Reaction necessary to generate enough Energy to represent MASS to Warp Space-Time to the extent necessary to make Interstellar Travel Viable. BUT HERE IS THE OTHER THING........ Since everything we currently know and that includes the very real Practical Applications that allow us to REASONABLY ASSUME.....that a MULTIVERSAL SYSTEM IS IN PLAY....which would account for the crazy things within Quantum Mechanics.....which means OUR UNIVERSE is simply but One INFINITE IN NUMBER DIVERGENT UNIVERSAL REALITY.....this changes issues as far as generating the necessary Energy with so small an amount of Antimatter available for use in a Matter/Antimatter Reaction. And this is where my NEED TO KNOW ISSUES come into play. Although Human's are but just beginning to understand the TINIEST AMOUNT OF KNOWLEDGE specific to such science....it seems others have a much deeper understanding. It would seem that when the specific Isotopse of a recently found to exist element of which 4 Isotopse of this Element are now known to exist but other Isotopse of this Element are predicted to exist.....anyways....when it is used in a Matter/Antimatter Reaction.......only a small amount of Antimatter needs to be used. WHY? Because since a Multiversal System is in play....when this Isotopse is mixed with Antimatter THE MATTER/ANTIMATTER REACTION RESULTS IN A MULTIVERSAL CASCADE REACTION WHICH GENERATES UNLIMITED AMOUNTS OF ENERGY NECESSARY TO REPRESENT THE IMMENSE MASS THAT ITSELF IS NECESSARY TO WARP OR FOLD SPACE-TIME TO THE EXTENT NECESSARY FOR VIABLE INTERSTELLAR TRAVEL. I will NOT answer any questions posed to me about this post....PERIOD! AboveAlpha
Sorry about that, I read it wrong. That's what I get for not having my glasses on when I'm reading forums. So the issue at hand is the voice of conscience. Well, except the link, everything I said still applies. Oh, and here is a link to a study that shows there is a neural component to the conscience: http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~jgreene/GreeneWJH/Greene-etal-Neuron04.pdf.
Subatomic particles aren't considered matter as most describe matter. They are degenerate matter, i.e. particles. Mass isn't matter.
While a photon has zero "rest mass" it still has mass but only at the speed of light. Based upon Einstein's equations all matter achieves infinite mass at the speed of light (i.e. the height and width remain the same, the length decreases and the mass increase) and, in the case of the photon, zero multipied by infinity equals one. This is actually an anomaly of math were zero and one can be proven to the equal based based upon the mathmatical definition of infinity as well as how the original creation of energy and matter can be established. Zero multipled an infinate number of times would account for all of the energy and mass in the universe as the "size of one" is never defined. The problem with your example is that it's attempting to measure "resting mass" of an object (the photon) that has zero resting mass. It is an invalid measurement of two different criteria (i.e. resting mass v moving mass).
Science often challenges "classic definitions" historically. If it didn't do this then science would never progress to beyond preconceived definitions. For example Euclid defined parallel lines as being two lines that remain at a constant distance apart and never meet but later on non-Euclidian geomerty defined parallel lines differently.
No doubt that was found edifying by many. That word is not to be found anywhere in the doucment. The requirement of serious bodily harm as a criterion for a "personal moral violation" is retarded. No attempt at theoretical resolution of the "trolley dilemma" has a damn thing to do with conscience. You're welcome. Then you're the first speaking member I've ever encountered of what, AFAIK, is an otherwise silent majority.
Photons only travel at the speed of light and are massless at that speed. Based on Einstein's equations only massless objects travel at the speed of light. Zero multiplied times infinity does not equal one. Zero multiplied an infinite number of times is still zero. We're just attempting to measure the mass of a box and its contents, nothing more. How is measuring the mass of a box invalid?
I have the funny feeling that your attempted explanation of how all this fits in with the research to obtain energy from quantum vacuum would be far far far better than anything that I could come up with!? http://www.theorionproject.org/en/quantumvacuum.html
Not true. Just because you aren't aware of it doesn't mean I'm wrong. A lot of people rely upon google for what they think and don't have a working knowledge of science. Maybe this will help. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degenerate_matter
Yeah...I have heard this argument of Mathematics that Zero times Infinity = 1. It can't and I will explain the logic behind it. First of all the INFINITE or INFINITY in Mathematical Terms runs both directions one Positive on Negative just as things exist in Nature. There is a Anti-Particle for every Particle. Infinity is described Mathematically as...........INFINITE.....to -5, -4, -3, -2, -1, 0 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, to.....INFINITE. Now Mathematically if you look at BOTH SIDES of the 0 or ZERO in the above Line Description you will understand that every Whole Positive Number to the RIGHT of the ZERO...IS CANCELLED OUT BY EVERY NEGATIVE NUMBER TO THE LEFT OF THE ZERO. Because of this INFINITY from a Numerical Mathematical Sum = 0. Thus 0 x 0 = 0. AboveAlpha
Sure it is. Which has no bearing on what I said, obviously. Only way it would help is if something in there says outright that degenerate matter isn't matter, which sounds kinda retarded on the face of it.
I was recently reading an article about how scientists can slow down the speed of a photon but would have to spend some time trying to relocate that article.
Actually this is a moment of one of my Unconscious Brain Recall deals. I remember that it was when Scientists used various forms of specifically cut Diamonds and perhaps Ruby's that the combination of the Carbon Atoms along with the Stones cut Geometry slowed down the Photons. I can't remember why though. Nice post! AboveAlpha
it's the other way around. I've received all of my information from physicists. I have no idea why you're finding this so hard to understand.
Actually I believe I understand very well. Even though I couldn't name three living physicists off the top of my head to save my life, I've challenged you to cite one who subscribes to your definition of matter; and though I figuratively stand here with chin thrust forward, eyes closed and arms akimbo, yer too much of a scaredy-cat to take a swing.
You've yet to provide any evidence that I'm wrong. Whether or not I can name a specific physicist isn't important. The fact remains that protons, electrons and neutrons aren't "matter" as you're trying to describe it. They are degenerate matter. There's a big difference and I've provided you citations. If you can't, won't or are incapable of accepting it isn't my problem. It's yours.
To be sure, your own conduct provides way more evidence for that than I have. I guess that's one way of looking at it. As I don't remember trying to describe matter at all, I'm afraid the point here eludes me. There's also a big difference between atoms and chemical compounds, but that hardly means one or the other isn't matter. The only one I remember you providing is the wiki link about degenerate matter, not a word of which supports your contention. Of course I say that having only skimmed the contents, but somehow I suspect my gorgeous countenance will remain unmarred all the same.
