Matter Defined: Mass, Volume & Time? Unit Ideas?

nuby
Messages
336
Reaction score
0
The definition of matter is "anything that has mass and volume". Why doesn't the definition of matter mention anything about "time". Should time be mentioned as well since matter can't exist without it?
Also, If matter had its own SI unit, what would it be?

Edit:: a unit that could be considered the 'inner parts' of a kg. i.e. m^3 / kg (?)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
nuby said:
If matter had its own SI unit, what would it be?

Besides the kilogram, you mean? :confused:
 
I think you have a good point.

Likely it's not explicitly mentioned because everything requires time to exist, I believe.

If there were no time, the nuclear, electromagnetic and other forces would be unable to propagate between particles.
 
jtbell said:
Besides the kilogram, you mean? :confused:

Yes, is there another way to define matter?
 

Thread 'A sufficient condition for integrability of equation ##\nabla g=0##'

In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
View full post »

Thread 'Relativator (Circular Slide-Rule): Simulated with Desmos - Insight'

Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. The Relativator was sold by (as printed) Atomic Laboratories, Inc. 3086 Claremont Ave, Berkeley 5, California , which seems to be a division of Cenco Instruments (Central Scientific Company)... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/relativator-circular-slide-rule-simulated-with-desmos/ by @robphy
View full post »

Thread 'Hawking After 54 Years Confirmed: BH surfaces don't shrink'

Abstract The gravitational-wave signal GW250114 was observed by the two LIGO detectors with a network matched-filter signal-to-noise ratio of 80. The signal was emitted by the coalescence of two black holes with near-equal masses ## m_1=33.6_{-0.8}^{+1.2} M_{⊙} ## and ## m_2=32.2_{-1. 3}^{+0.8} M_{⊙}##, and small spins ##\chi_{1,2}\leq 0.26 ## (90% credibility) and negligible eccentricity ##e⁢\leq 0.03.## Postmerger data excluding the peak region are consistent with the dominant quadrupolar...
View full post »

Similar threads

I Simplification of Dark Matter effects
Replies
12
Views
2K
I Time Measurement in Extremely Curved Space Regions
2
Replies
95
Views
7K
B The Missing Mass of a reaction
Replies
1
Views
1K
I Is there a zero-mass, vacuum Schwarzschild GR solution?
Replies
27
Views
3K
B What is the physical significance of mass-time-length equivalences in physics?
Replies
8
Views
2K
I Negative Mass and Hawking Radiation
Replies
6
Views
3K
A Interior volume of a black hole
Replies
23
Views
3K
I Integrity of matter / space and time
Replies
13
Views
4K
I Constancy of the speed of light
2
Replies
50
Views
6K
I Trouble understanding the SI definition of 1 second
2
Replies
56
Views
6K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top