Cutting, at the atomic/molecular level

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Grantdh
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cutting
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of cutting at the atomic and molecular level, specifically addressing the nature of touch and the role of electron repulsion in cutting. Participants explore the relationship between electromagnetic forces and the mechanics of cutting, drawing parallels to philosophical questions and mathematical concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the inability to "touch" something is due to electron repulsion, questioning how cutting is possible under this assumption.
  • Others argue that the electromagnetic force between electrons is what facilitates cutting, suggesting that sufficient electric repulsion can be considered a form of touching.
  • A participant questions the philosophical nature of the inquiry, suggesting that it may not be purely philosophical if it can be addressed mathematically.
  • There is a suggestion that a sharp object, like a surgeon's scalpel, applies a more precisely directed electromagnetic force, which enhances cutting effectiveness.
  • Some participants discuss the concept of pressure in relation to cutting, proposing that the density of the electric field at the contact point relates to what is understood as pressure on a macroscopic scale.
  • One participant emphasizes the need for a precise operational definition of "touching" in the context of electromagnetic repulsion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of touch and the implications of electron repulsion, with no consensus reached on the philosophical aspects of the question or the definitions involved.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes assumptions about the definitions of touching and pressure, as well as the relationship between microscopic forces and macroscopic effects, which remain unresolved.

Grantdh
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I know there is supposedly no such thing as a stupid question but this might make some of you reconsider if that is true.

We assume that we can never actually touch something due to electron repulsion. How then is it possible for something to cut you?

I know this sounds a lot like Zeno's paradox, which was solved with calculous. So I guess I'm wondering if there is a way to reconcile this.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why is this a "philosophical" question?

Zz.
 
Grantdh said:
We assume that we can never actually touch something due to electron repulsion. How then is it possible for something to cut you?

The repulsive EM force between the electrons is what does the cutting.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Well I was thinking of it like Zeno's paradox which I assumed is a philosophical question but thinking about it now I realize a philosophical question, by definition, does not have an answer. So that must mean Zeno's paradox is no longer a philosophical question but a simple calculus question.
 
Grantdh said:
We assume that we can never actually touch something due to electron repulsion.

Who assumes that? To add to Drakkith's post, sufficient electric repulsion is touching.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Thank you Darkkith. That makes a lot of sense. So is it correct to say that an extremely sharp object, like a surgeons scalpel, simply allows for a more precisely applied EM force?
 
ModusPwnd I guess a more precise operational definition has to be made for touching. Like you said our day to day definition of touching is sufficient EM repulsion.
 
Grantdh said:
Thank you Darkkith. That makes a lot of sense. So is it correct to say that an extremely sharp object, like a surgeons scalpel, simply allows for a more precisely applied EM force?

Yes, a sharp edge concentrates the applied force along a very thin line instead of spreading it out.
 
Drakkith said:
Yes, a sharp edge concentrates the applied force along a very thin line instead of spreading it out.

I guess the density of the force (electric field) imbalance where the sharp edge contacts the material must relate to what we would normally call 'pressure'. The effectiveness at cutting and penetration boils down to pressure - on a macroscopic scale.
 
  • #10
Thread has been retitled, to conform to our requirement that thread title must be descriptive of the content.

Zz.
 
  • #11
sophiecentaur said:
I guess the density of the force (electric field) imbalance where the sharp edge contacts the material must relate to what we would normally call 'pressure'. The effectiveness at cutting and penetration boils down to pressure - on a macroscopic scale.

I believe so since pressure is the applied force divided by the area it is applied to. P=F/A
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
8K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K