Is the universe actually just mass and length?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter babaliaris
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Length Mass Universe
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the assertion that the universe is fundamentally composed of three quantities: mass, length, and time. Participants debate the validity of this claim, emphasizing that while these quantities are crucial in classical physics, they do not encompass all properties of the universe. Concepts such as charge, measured in Coulombs, are identified as additional fundamental properties that cannot be reduced to mass, length, and time. The conversation highlights the complexity of physical properties and the limitations of a simplistic view of the universe.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of classical physics principles
  • Familiarity with fundamental physical quantities such as mass, length, and time
  • Knowledge of electrical charge and its measurement in Coulombs
  • Basic grasp of scientific properties and their relationships
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the role of charge in physics and its implications in electromagnetism
  • Study the relationship between mass, length, and time in Newtonian mechanics
  • Investigate modern physics concepts such as quantum mechanics and fundamental properties
  • Learn about the mathematical formulations that describe physical phenomena beyond mass, length, and time
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators in the field, and anyone interested in the foundational concepts of the universe and the interplay of physical properties.

babaliaris
Messages
116
Reaction score
15
After reading some classical physics I learned that the entire physics is actually studying the combination of 3 quantities mass, length and time. Anything in the universe is just the combination of mass and length and time. And why i say that? Because if you notice the formulas that the physicians have invented until now, every object or non object like energy is being described using the quantities length and mass, while time is actually taking place in the change of rate. And if we stay at Newton's region, mass is constant so in other words time causes one thing, the change of length. What is speed? m/s .What is energy? kg * m^2 / s^2 . So the only thing that actually changes is length and time.

So time is a variable quantity which might cause length to change (usually position).

So everything in the universe is actually just mass and length with the the possibility that length might change under some circumstances over time. For example if forces are being applied in an object the object might change position over time.

So what if time didn't exists or stopped? Would things then just stop to change (freeze) and become static?
 
Space news on Phys.org
Just out of curiosity, where do you think, for example, charge, comes into play in your concept of the universe?
 
phinds said:
Just out of curiosity, where do you think, for example, charge, comes into play in your concept of the universe?
Well charges are measured in Coulombs which is a number of electrons and electrons actually have mass and size.
 
babaliaris said:
Well charges are measured in Coulombs which is a number of electrons and electrons actually have mass and size.
So do neutrons. I really don't think you've thought this through.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn
I think
phinds said:
So do neutrons. I really don't think you've thought this through.
I think I got you now. You're saying Culomb is just an amount of electrons and so is not a combination of mass, length and time like Newtons or Joules.
 
babaliaris said:
I think

I think I got you now. You're saying Culomb is just an amount of electrons and so is not a combination of mass, length and time like Newtons or Joules.
No, I'm saying that charge is a PROPERTY, like length, mass, etc. Coulomb is just a measure of that property like the meter is a measure of length. You clearly have not thought through the characteristics of the various properties that things can have and for some reason you believe that there are only 3 properties. I just demonstrated another. It doesn't stop there.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: babaliaris
babaliaris said:
After reading some classical physics I learned that the entire physics is actually studying the combination of 3 quantities mass, length and time. Anything in the universe is just the combination of mass and length and time.

babaliaris said:
Well charges are measured in Coulombs which is a number of electrons and electrons actually have mass and size.

Modern physics has a number of things which could be considered fundamental. Some of them are part of how we define the relationships between the relative location, shape, and size of objects along with the properties of the space they exist within (space in a geometrical sense, which may or may not include time). Some of them are properties of objects, such as charge, mass, spin number, or many of the flavour numbers of quantum physics. These are usually considered to be fundamental because we have no way of describing how they arise, we only know what effect they have.

I would not consider everything in the universe, which includes the properties of objects and spacetime, to be solely made up of length, mass, and time.

babaliaris said:
After reading some classical physics I learned that the entire physics is actually studying the combination of 3 quantities mass, length and time. Anything in the universe is just the combination of mass and length and time. And why i say that? Because if you notice the formulas that the physicians have invented until now, every object or non object like energy is being described using the quantities length and mass, while time is actually taking place in the change of rate.

This is simply not true. I can find many formulas which do not have terms for mass, length, or time in them. The equations that do have terms for these three properties do so because they are concerned with the position, mass, energy, momentum, velocity, or any of the other properties derived from or having to do with these three. The equations which do not have terms for mass, length, or time are not concerned with them.

I think what you've stumbled across is that most of science is concerned with how things change. A situation in which there is absolutely no change is a.) boring, b.) unrealistic, and c.) of little use. And most of the types of change that you've ever dealt with up until now consists almost solely of change with the position and/or mass of objects (usually by constructing or destructing an object, and I use those words in a very general sense), which requires time.

While time, length, and mass are extremely important in science, and a great many things are derived from or are in units involving them, they are not everything.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: babaliaris
phinds said:
No, I'm saying that charge is a PROPERTY, like length, mass, etc. Coulomb is just a measure of that property like the meter is a measure of length. You clearly have not thought through the characteristics of the various properties that things can have and for some reason you believe that there are only 3 properties. I just demonstrated another. It doesn't stop there.
I where saying the same, I just didn't know that property was the word to describe it. I understand what you're saying thought. Thank you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
605
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
3K