Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HappinessHappening)
    How can something be indivisible though? Technology aside, how can it be theoretically impossible to divide something into even smaller particles?
    If it was a "point particle" which was zero-dimensional, with no length, height, radius etc.

    Also at the miniature scale that these particles are, they also behave as waves eg. light particles (called photons) which have no mass and are like a tiny bundle of pure energy, act as waves. Electrons are particles and do have mass, but under certain circumstances can also behave as waves.

    So while we call these things "particles", they are quite different from what we traditionally imagine particles to be like.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rucklo)
    http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_particle

    Personally I believe we will take it further one day but for this current time, that is why.
    But . . . that still doesn't seem to answer my question.

    Essentially, if something exists in space, then surely it must, by definition, be divisible?

    I hope you see where I'm coming from. lol
    Offline

    11
    (Original post by HappinessHappening)
    Why are they set by the properties of mass? Why are gravitons 'given and taken' in the first place?

    I'm probably being annoying now. lol
    There only something that is predicted from the string theory.

    The reasons they give and take, I'm not actually sure if anyone knows.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nuada)
    If it was a "point particle" which was zero-dimensional, with no length, height, radius etc.
    Whaaaat?

    How does that make any sense, even to scientists? How the hell can something be zero-dimensional?!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HappinessHappening)
    I mean, why do they follow the rules they follow? Why do they exist at all?

    I guess nobody knows the answers to these kinds of questions . . .
    They just do, its why they're laws in the first place.

    Its said that in other universes the laws may be different, and whatever is in those universes may be bound to a completely different set of rules.

    Some people like to put it down to a god putting order among the mayhem of the universe, or something similar.

    But uhm... yeah why does everything obey these laws? I certainly couldnt tell you, and I doubt anybody else could.
    Offline

    11
    (Original post by HappinessHappening)
    But . . . that still doesn't seem to answer my question.

    Essentially, if something exists in space, then surely it must, by definition, be divisible?

    I hope you see where I'm coming from. lol
    When you get to quarks it basically just becomes energy very simply. Which can exist with no mass.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rucklo)
    I'm not actually sure if anyone knows.
    It's kind of amazing to reach that level, isn't it? It must be especially fascinating for you as a science student.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rucklo)
    When you get to quarks it basically just becomes energy very simply. Which can exist with no mass.
    How does it make the transition to that? At what point does matter become 'massless'?
    Offline

    11
    (Original post by HappinessHappening)
    It's kind of amazing to reach that level, isn't it? It must be especially fascinating for you as a science student.
    Too be fair I only do A2 chemistry, I just read a lot of crap online.

    I'm sure one day all these questions will be answered, but for now there are still small holes that need to be filled, and thats why science can not be said to over role religion because it is as of now not 100% water tight.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rucklo)
    When you get to quarks it basically just becomes energy very simply. Which can exist with no mass.
    I just saw this on Wiki:

    "Physical space is often regarded as infinitely divisible: it is thought that any region in space, no matter how small, could be further split. Similarly, time is infinitely divisible."

    That's amazing. But at the same time it makes no sense! And the alternative makes no sense either!


    Aaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!! !!
    Offline

    11
    (Original post by HappinessHappening)
    How does it make the transition to that? At what point does matter become 'massless'?
    It's just as you break it down, struggling to think of a good example. But as you break it down it just is the parts which make up the thing which you just broke down.

    If you read up on Quarks and how each type is used to make up protons etc it will probably explain it a bit better than me.
    Offline

    11
    (Original post by HappinessHappening)
    I just saw this on Wiki:

    "Physical space is often regarded as infinitely divisible: it is thought that any region in space, no matter how small, could be further split. Similarly, time is infinitely divisible."

    That's amazing. But at the same time it makes no sense! And the alternative makes no sense either!


    Aaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!! !!
    Hahaha yeah it hurts your head :p:.

    You can divide something in two because /2 will never equal 0. However the stability and usefulness of what you get is a different question.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HappinessHappening)
    Whaaaat?

    How does that make any sense, even to scientists? How the hell can something be zero-dimensional?!
    You're actually asking questions that the human brain isn't designed to comprehend. We can try and understand, which is what scientists around the world atempt to do, but to ultimately there are limits to what we can understand.

    Take the idea that everything in this universe is actually made of energy... really think about it... what does this really mean?

    The universe is also said to be infinite, this is something that we simply cannot comprehend even if we tried. Its why people came up with the idea of God, a higher being that obviously understands everything (because he made everything?). To me this sounds pretty ignorant and a pretty easy way out, but alas, its simply the way some people choose to explain everything. :P

    My posts are pretty badly worded, but i hope you can understand where im coming from and the ideas im trying to get across. Its actually quite hard to write down your thoughts on such complex subects
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HappinessHappening)
    I just saw this on Wiki:

    "Physical space is often regarded as infinitely divisible: it is thought that any region in space, no matter how small, could be further split. Similarly, time is infinitely divisible."

    That's amazing. But at the same time it makes no sense! And the alternative makes no sense either!


    Aaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!! !!
    Yeah like before A2 physics you'd think protons and electrons were elementary particles...only then you realise you've been lied to (well partly anyway, electrons are elementary particles)
    Then you learn about quarks, leptons and all sorts...they have flavours :mmm: Even though it's true that they have flavours...I've always found it funny...
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rucklo)
    If you could enlighten me on how being able to see the bonds between atoms is not proof? If there were not atoms why would there be bonds?
    Hypothetically there could be another theory which explains the images without the existence of atoms, just because this isn't the accepted theory doesn't mean its wrong. Science cannot prove anything without some basic assertions thus it is impossible to know that the atoms exist and that what is in that picture is the atom as modern theory describes it. I'm not saying its not a good reason to believe that atoms exist just not a good reason to claim you know atoms exist.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tomo2000)
    You're actually asking questions that the human brain isn't designed to comprehend. We can try and understand, which is what scientists around the world atempt to do, but to ultimately there are limits to what we can understand. Its actually quite hard to write down your thoughts on such complex subects
    I thank you for trying! These really are some of the most fascinating scientific/philosophical problems of all. The great mysteries of existence, eh? Can't beat 'em.

    *goes to bed and fruitlessly tries to comprehend infinity, infinite divisibility, time, energy . . . *
    Offline

    11
    (Original post by Dadeyemi)
    Hypothetically there could be another theory which explains the images without the existence of atoms, just because this isn't the accepted theory doesn't mean its wrong. Science cannot prove anything without some basic assertions thus it is impossible to know that the atoms exist and that what is in that picture is the atom as modern theory describes it. I'm not saying its not a good reason to believe that atoms exist just not a good reason to claim you know atoms exist.
    Of-course if there was another theory which had a valid and logical explanation, but there does not seem to be one?

    The charge of single atoms has been measured, surely eventually such as in a murder trial, you get enough proof without having to see the event?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HappinessHappening)
    Whaaaat?

    How does that make any sense, even to scientists? How the hell can something be zero-dimensional?!
    If it is just a single point, which does not extend outwards in any direction.

    An electron, for example, has mass and charge and energy, but no "size". It is treated as a single point. Photons also, which have no mass or charge also, only a discrete amount of pure energy.

    BUT these "particles" also act as waves. So an individual photon has a frequency and a wavelength, like a wave.

    In this way it has both a "wave nature" and a "particle nature".
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2kuayyaz)
    I honestly need further proof of the theories that scientist hav come up with. I mean in their world bees should not be able to fly.

    Incorrect. That "proof" assumes that the bee's wings are stationary.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HappinessHappening)
    How does it make the transition to that? At what point does matter become 'massless'?
    Energy and mass can be converted into one another.For example the energy holding a nucleus together comes from some of the mass of the nucleus being converted into energy.

    You could say all matter is a form of energy.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.