Glass is not a liquid?

  • Thread starter jobyts
  • Start date
  • #1
210
53
Since my high school days, I learned that glass is a liquid. (Science naive students thought glass is solid, and the smarty pants knew it was actually a liquid:) Yesterday, while I was telling this interesting fact to my daughter, my wife argued that glass is solid. I googled to explain them why glass is a liquid, but apparently science web sites points out that "glass is liquid" is an urban legend. Seems like I was wrong all these years. I thought of posting this here because some people here might be thinking glass is a liquid.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
270
5
How you define "liquid" is the important question to ask. Depending on your definition, it can be either a liquid or solid.

If you had a 100 year old glass pane, and you measured the top and bottom, you'd find that the bottom would be slightly thicker.
 
  • #3
1,195
512
I googled to explain them why glass is a liquid, but apparently science web sites points out that "glass is liquid" is an urban legend. Seems like I was wrong all these years.

Idk, jobyts. Looks like the jokes on you...:redface:
 
  • #5
Physics_UG
Gold Member
285
2
liquids take the shape of their container. Glass doesn't.
 
  • #6
210
53
liquids take the shape of their container. Glass doesn't.

Is water liquid at zero gravity?
 
  • #7
270
5
That's what all the web sites say as a myth. They designed the glass pane bottom thicker for stability.

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/General/Glass/glass.html

It might be a myth, I've never tried it myself :tongue:, but it claims on the bottom exactly what I mentioned in my first post.

In terms of molecular dynamics and thermodynamics it is possible to justify various different views that it is a highly viscous liquid, an amorphous solid, or simply that glass is another state of matter that is neither liquid nor solid. The difference is semantic
 
  • #8
1,195
512
Is water liquid at zero gravity?

Are you serious? Tell me you haven't seen the NASA videos with the guys sucking liquid water/juice balls out of mid-air on the space station, etc.. Those are liquids, it's just the surface tension that makes them look like balls. As Physics_UG pointed out, you can see the balls morph as if they would take the shape of their container.
 
  • #9
6,362
1,283
We had a long, long thread about this a few years back. For all intents and purposes, glass is a solid. It won't flow over the course of a few hundred years. However, by some strict technical definition, according to former mentor, Gokul90210, it is often classified as a liquid. You might see some flow over billions of years.
 
  • #10
210
53
Are you serious? Tell me you haven't seen the NASA videos with the guys sucking liquid water/juice balls out of mid-air on the space station, etc.. Those are liquids, it's just the surface tension that makes them look like balls. As Physics_UG pointed out, you can see the balls morph as if they would take the shape of their container.

Can you please point me to a video? Searching with the keywords (guys sucking liquid water/juice balls) you mentioned points me to weird videos :)

Unless there is an external force (gravity or something else) to overcome the surface tension, any matter would retain its shape. In this case, before the sucking action by the astronauts , was the water ball liquid or solid? Given enough force, most (if not all) solids could become liquids.

As mentioned before (by Astrum), the definition of liquid/solid is a loose one, and assumes normal forces acting upon them. (as earth's surface gravity). A definition for liquids as it takes-the-shape-of-container is not complete. With that definition, a freely falling rain drop (with no other external forces on it) is not a liquid.
 
  • #11
1,195
512
Can you please point me to a video? Searching with the keywords (guys sucking liquid water/juice balls) you mentioned points me to weird videos :).

How about this one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4o1lr9LxODc
 
  • #13
1,195
512
Or this one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s63JXdsL5LU
 
  • #14
Borek
Mentor
28,822
3,340
This is related:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pitch_drop_experiment

It is a matter of viscosity. Very high viscosity makes us think about tar as of a solid, yet given enough time it flows. I am not sure if the glass will flow at the room temperature - at least not in typical timescales, at least not all glass types - but the same reasoning applies.

Basically we are trying to apply separate names to a continuous reality that doesn't care about our definitions.
 
  • #15
SteamKing
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
12,798
1,670
Is water liquid at zero gravity?

It depends on its temperature, just like when it is on earth.
 
  • #16
Astronuc
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
19,945
3,468
Since my high school days, I learned that glass is a liquid. (Science naive students thought glass is solid, and the smarty pants knew it was actually a liquid:) Yesterday, while I was telling this interesting fact to my daughter, my wife argued that glass is solid. I googled to explain them why glass is a liquid, but apparently science web sites points out that "glass is liquid" is an urban legend. Seems like I was wrong all these years. I thought of posting this here because some people here might be thinking glass is a liquid.
It's an amorphous solid. Generally it retains it's shape. Under pressure/stress, glass and ceramics (e.g., concrete) will deform/creep very slowly.
 
  • #17
Andy Resnick
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
7,621
2,300
Materials that are commonly referred to as 'glass' are disordered solids. Glassy materials include colloids, foams, emulsions, granular materials, and are characterized by dramatic changes to macroscopic properties (viscosity) without corresponding changes to microscopic properties (structure) as the 'glass transition' is approached.

The nature of the glass transition is not completely understood.
 
  • #18
russ_watters
Mentor
21,071
7,806
Is water liquid at zero gravity?
Er, that question implies you are talking about water floating in a ball in the middle of the space station, not in a container. But how do you think it got there!
 
  • #19
FlexGunship
Gold Member
399
8
That's what all the web sites say as a myth. They designed the glass pane bottom thicker for stability.

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/General/Glass/glass.html

To add to this, I live close to Strawbery Banke (not a typo), where some of the oldest original windows in the country are still in use. The process that made glass windows in the 1600s left one side thicker than the other (unintentionally), window installers would simply place the thicker side on the bottom for stability. The taper itself, however, was not intentional just a byproduct of the spinning that was done to make the pane as smooth as possible. The best windows were considered to be the ones that had the least taper to them and were, therefore, more distortion free.
 
  • #20
728
27
Glass is neither solid nor liquid. It's all an illuminati plot.
 
  • #21
davenn
Science Advisor
Gold Member
9,576
8,634
It's an amorphous solid. Generally it retains it's shape. Under pressure/stress, glass and ceramics (e.g., concrete) will deform/creep very slowly.

yup, just like the crust of the earth does. Ductile deformation.
tho if "pushed" too hard and fast we will see brittle deformation mode, fracturing/shattering, just as with glass

Dave
 
  • #22
195
1
It's good that glass in ultra-precise optical instruments doesn't "run" very much.

Which brings to mind that 100 year-old glass that was ground and polished to extreme accuracy could be remeasured to see if anything changed. If no change, stick it on a shelf for a couple hundred years and check it again...
 
  • #23
davenn
Science Advisor
Gold Member
9,576
8,634
It's good that glass in ultra-precise optical instruments doesn't "run" very much.

Which brings to mind that 100 year-old glass that was ground and polished to extreme accuracy could be remeasured to see if anything changed. If no change, stick it on a shelf for a couple hundred years and check it again...

true, but I suspect the effect would be only really noticeable on much larger and thinner sheets of glass, rather than on say ... lenses etc an inch or so thick and maybe a few inches in diameter


Dave
 
  • #25
Andy Resnick
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
7,621
2,300
true, but I suspect the effect would be only really noticeable on much larger and thinner sheets of glass, rather than on say ... lenses etc an inch or so thick and maybe a few inches in diameter


Dave

Prehistoric obsidian cutting implements are still sharp- is >10k years enough time for you?
 

Related Threads on Glass is not a liquid?

  • Last Post
Replies
20
Views
6K
Replies
18
Views
9K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
903
  • Last Post
Replies
15
Views
8K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Top