Uh...of course matter can be created and destroyed. Not easily, but it's possible. This applies to energy not matter.
@unknownjanitor, and that’s why they’re a science teacher and not a scientist.
@unknownjanitor, I'm assuming you're talking about the mass loss in fission. It's a simplified law, the real one (I'll paraphrase) says "the amount of matter AND energy in the universe is constant and neither can be created or destroyed, just changed from one form to another". That was before we knew E=Mc^2, which says there is a direct conversion between matter and energy and in think it's string theory and the Higgs boson that says all matter is basically solidified energy. So in a nuclear explosion, there is "mass lost" but its converted into energy based on E=Mc^2, it changes form, but the sum of...stuff.. remains the same (by E=Mc^2).
How do you say energy is destroyed?
@codyl, oh, this'll actually be kinda a fun conversation. I 100% agree with you that matter is, in fact, energy, as matter is simply just an excitation of the higgs field which gives the 'illusion' of mass. I was actually referring to the creation of particle and antiparticle pairs in a vacuum. How, if you input enough energy you can create actual mass by separating the antimatter far enough away from the matter that was created with it. So, a better statement would be 'the amount of energy/matter in the universe is constant'. You can create matter, but not without creating antimatter with it. I suppose I'm just being pedantic haha
@unknownjanitor, As all good scientists should be!
@unknownjanitor, Sounds likevwe cane down to arguing similar points, just different definitions of create and destroy. I hope to overanalyze minecraft physics with you again someday.
@unknownjanitor, this is funny pics, take your nerd orgy elsewhere
@codyl, the statement that matter is solidified energy is fallacious. It would require that both energy has a non solid, but tangible form (which is terribly misleading), and matter is solid.
Energy is nothing more than a system's ability to do work. Its a number, a property, just like temperature, or charge. You cant just have energy independant of something to have the energy.
Matter is only solid in that there is a tangible reaction when you touch it. In actuality, matter only has this reaction because of the repulsive nature of electrons coming too close to each other. There isnt really a condensed structure to matter.
As a bonus, mass is simply the measurement of the total amount of energy in a system. This takes into account the inherent energy of matter (presumably given by the higgs boson) as well as all other forms energy can take (heat, elastic-potential, electrical charge, chemical, etc). In fact, a wound up clock (old mechanical style) has more mass than an unwound one
@Darth Panserbjorne, though insignificantly differing
@Darth Panserbjorne, "Solidified energy" was the best phrasing I could think of. I know there is some Higgs boson interaction that I didn't know enough about to make statement. I meant it's "Solidified" as in "you have an amount of tangible matter and if you lose so much of it (fission/matter anti matter reaction) you turn it into intangible energy".
@codyl, the point i was making is that energy is a property, not appropiately describable using terms that describe matter. While intangible is a technically correct term, it carries the implication that energy has some form, which it doesnt.
I hope im not coming off as an asshole. I sincerely am solely trying to be informative
@Darth Panserbjorne, Doesn't E=MC^2 there are do many Joules of energy in a kilogram of matter? If you can get your cells messed up my gamma radiation (not like alpha or beta, which do have mass) or your flesh scorched by geat, wouldn't you say it's more than a property?
Mass lost, nuke go boom, heat and radiation are the byproduct, and in a predictable amount.
@codyl, e=mc^2 (not the full equation btw, but the rest is usually non applicable) is actually energy=mass*the constant speed of light squared.
Its used to describe the relationship between mass and energy. Matter has mass, and can lose mass by emitting particles (even massless ones) which have their own energy therefore losing energy in the system. In your analogy, you are actually introducing energy into a system. The manner in which you do so alters the structure of your cells.
Properties tell us what a thing is doing. By altering a property, you can cause a change in the thing. For example, by simply increasing or decreasing molecular motion in a system, matter can take different forms as seperate phases. Depending on how you freeze water, for example, you can get a number of different types of ice.
Also, to be more confusing (and this is approaching the limit of my ability to explain well), though photons themselves do not have mass, their energy is calculated into the total
@Darth Panserbjorne, mass of a system, further supporting the relationship between mass and energy
@Darth Panserbjorne, @codyl, NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRDS!
@unknownjanitor, this can also work if they form on the edge of a black hole
One flies in
Other out to infinity
Probs a bad explanation but eh
@BeeJaaBee, yeah totally, Hawking radiation is really cool. These particle-antiparticle pairs form constantly everywhere in space, but normally just annihilate each other. Sometimes these particles both spawn inside the event horizon of the black hole, both get pulled in, but the black hole gains and loses nothing because they negate each other. Other times the negative mass particle will spawn closer to the black hole, passed the event horizon, but the positive mass particle will not. The positive particle will escape into space, and the negative particle will be attracted into the black hole. This is how black holes are constantly radiating mass, and implies that eventually, over billions of years, black holes will eventually radiate away into nothing from this loss of mass. You probably already knew all this stuff, but I was just explaining it in case anyone stumbled across this thread and was interested in knowing how it worked. (Nice pfp btw)
@unknownjanitor, yeah, PBS Spacetime has a really good series on it and related issues (namely infomation pardox). I'd check them out on YouTube if you want to know more
It's one of my favourite artworks i got.
Love a bit of Scruffy in your pfp
First of all anything is possible through jesus * meme