Definitive measurement that determines state of matter?

AI Thread Summary
Determining a substance's state of matter can be challenging, as definitions like "very little room between molecules" lack empirical clarity. The discussion highlights that while practical tests exist, such as pouring a substance to identify liquids or assessing structural integrity for solids, these methods can be subjective. The distinction between solid and liquid states is often blurred, especially in cases like non-Newtonian fluids or substances at critical points. The conversation emphasizes that states of matter are rough characterizations rather than strict classifications. Overall, the complexity of physical systems complicates the definitive measurement of states of matter.
curiousoldguy
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
What is an (the?) empirically demonstrable method used for determining a substance's state of matter?

If a new substance was discovered and scientist A said it's solid and scientist B said it's a liquid, how would it be demonstrably proven to be one or the other? The books I have define states of matter in scientifically unsatisfying terms like "if there is very little room between molecules but they can move it's a liquid": it doesn't seem testable: my definition of "very little room" might be different than yours. For example, is there a magic heat capacity that for any substance, if it's above 25 J/C it's by definition a solid? I can look-up tables of characteristics for known substances, but what about one that falls from outer space we know nothing about?

Thanks for any insight. :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A substance's state of matter is just a rough characterization. Real physical systems are not always so clearly distinct to where they can be classified. For example, at the critical point and beyond the liquid and gas phases are not distinct.
 
See/Google "non-Newtonian fluids."
 
Thanks. I got the feeling they were general terms. :)
 
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...
Back
Top