Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: RightWhale

Interesting discussion, the very nature of matter. At this scale, when refering to 'empty space' it does become very important to keep in mind 'empty of what.' Our current understanding is that the electron around an atom is described as a probabilty function. Depending on the orbital, there are regions of space, nodes, where there is zero probability of finding the electron. On that basis, it is sufficent to say there is nothing occupying that space. Bouncing a proton off a nucleus does give a value for it's size, within limits. X-ray diffraction also shows that even a crystal, is mostly empty space, but with discrete particles arranged in a repetitive structure. The space between these particles being orders of magnitude greater than the size of the particles themselves. I also think that the compressability of matter is imporant whan discussing it's nature. Or .look at zeolites. They are a material with pores on the molecular scale. Molecules can diffuse through them. Lots of space there, but just in lots and lots of tiny, tiny channels.

On a fundamental level, one must question the ability of something to interact with somehting else. To a neutrino, there isn't much in the universe to interact with at all. The original comment I replied to was a poster writing "Space without matter is an oxymoron." I merely replied that the post didn't make sense. But then, if you accept that matter is rolled-up multidimensional space, then it would be correct. But I believe your post to be of an educated albeit speculative nature whereas the first one was vacuous, pardon the pun.


106 posted on 08/04/2006 10:29:50 AM PDT by doc30 (Democrats are to morals what and Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies ]


To: doc30

Replies are a kind of Rorshach test of 'what is your mood right now' based on who were you talking to just before you responded to a post: your wife, your mistress, your neighbor, or your dog.


127 posted on 08/04/2006 11:11:02 AM PDT by RightWhale (Repeal the law of the excluded middle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies ]

To: doc30
On a fundamental level, one must question the ability of something to interact with somehting else. To a neutrino, there isn't much in the universe to interact with at all.

Careful, there.

If you can't measure something (i.e. by its interactions with other things) then the question is, "Does it exist, or not?"

Apparently neutrinos are predicted by conservation laws. Angels are not.

The standard model therefore includes one but not the other....

485 posted on 08/07/2006 9:20:07 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson