What is matter?

You are probably already asking yourself a similar question- What is the matter?But does matter actualy exist?There is an electro magnetic field surrounding every atom which itself is energy and not matter. Even surrounding electrons is a field. Atoms never actually touch one another. Their electro magnetic force fields pull and repulse each other, so in reality all that actually comes into contact is the fields of individual parts, whether that's electrons or sub atomic particles. Of course, depending on their charge, they sometimes attract also, otherwise we would not have the chemical bonding that causes the emergence of molecules.
So, if all matter is basically made up of electromagnetic force fields, then you could say that matter, as we imagine it, does not exist and that what we see as molecules (the basic building blocks of all matter) is just a matter of the different ways in which these electro-magnetic fiels (atoms) are configured.We tend to imagine matter as a 'solid' substance and energy as some radio-wave like unsolid thing. Would it be correct then to say that in fact matter does not exist and only exists in the same way that a hand written message exists due to the configuration of the ink on the paper? That the ink and the paper is all that 'actually' exists and the message(hand-writing) is just the way the ink is placed in relation to other dots of ink until it forms a message? The paper exists as a solid thing and the ink exists as a solid thing but the message is just perceived/implied so in the strictest sense could be said to not exist.Or a better question - does reality exist in the first place? Or does it only exist to "us" who are trapped in a peculiar state of the fields?What in reality gives matter the solid feel it has, when the ingredients of matter themselves are not solid(there is almost an infinite space between an electron and the nucleus, when compared to the size of the atom) and all the atoms comprising a plastic piece are "tied" together by magnetic fields?Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

No, matter as we normally think of it - atoms - are a complete mixture of fields - definitely electromagnetic as you mention, but also other force fields - the strong in particular - and actual *matter* fields. Just as there is an electromagnetic field which is what gives rise to photons, there is an "electron" field that gives rise to electrons, and there are quark fields. But you are still very close in your thinking. The solidity we feel at the molecular level and above is almost entirely electromagnetic in origin. But the physcial size of the atoms is a property of the electron matter field, known as the Pauli Exclusion Principle. In fact, the definition of matter is essentially that that obeys the PEP. Two very good questions - I would say no and yes Now - must get back to Nosy's string theory questions...Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.

So what we think of as Matter is really the interaction of a few magnetic, electric, gravitational, etc fields(i.e. matter is field)? Gives us a totally new look on reality, and this mess doesn't even begin to make sense to my constrained human mind, when viewed in regard to our day-to-day lives. I think i need to stop asking questions or i may need a reality check pretty soon.

Yes, and so is "empty" space It just doesn't have much in the way of excitations in the matter fields at those points. Go even further, and what we call "distance" becomes just excitations in the gravitational field, so even the idea of space disappears...

I'm not certain what you mean. Are you using the word "reality" to mean "the Unvierse as we perceive it?" If that's the case, you're right to say that our experience of the Universe is somewhat illusory. We "see" a very small part of the Universe, being far too large to observe the working of subatomic particles and far too tiny to observe the interactions of galaxies and glacatic clusters. Science has allowed us to glimpse these aspects of the universe, and perhaps the most true thing we've found is that our frame of reference, which determines "common sense," is consistently wrong at those scales due to insufficient information. The reality of the Universe is far stranger than we imagine.Time, for example, is illusory. It's jsut a dimension like width and height, but we experience it differently, and so it seems different to us. It's not. It's the same. Our experience of time as a one-way linear chain of events in the direction of increasing entropy is simply a side-effect of how our brains work - our brains are electrochemical machines and as such require increasing entropy to "function," so we experience time only in that direction at a single rate.Even speed is illusory. Everything moves at a single speed - the speed of light. But just as you can move partially in the horizontal dimension and partially in the vertical dimension, we are also moving in the dimension of time. By increasing your speed in the spacial dimensions, you're reducing your speed in the time dimension - hence time dialation as per general relativity. This is also why the speed of light is the "cosmic speed limit" - it's in reality the only speed that exists. If you could move at the speed of light, time for you relative to the outside observer would stop. Of course, your relative mass increases and approaches infinity as you approach the speed of light as well, so it would require infinite energy to reach the speed of light, but that's another topic.

This new concept of matter(that it's a field) sure makes the Universe and the emergence of life even more incomprehensible.(not that it ever was).
Do you think we humans with our science will ever be able to fully understand the causes, circumstances and intricate relations within the fields at the time of the emergence of life and reality(reality being tied to life)?Could some entity from another dimension be "playing" with a device for "tuning in" fields and causing this illusion in all of us we call life? (considering the fact that you don't like god/s/ as explanations)Do you think the Quantum Field Theory the reason why Einstein said that "the most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it's comprehensible"? Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

No, i was talking about the fields and that only they "truly" exist. Our reality is just a "flair" or "flavour" of the the fields and their interactions. The nature of the emergence of life under this sceanrio seems almost impossible to explain without a cause(either the fields' degree of freedom maxed out to eternity and we are just 1 outcome of an infinite number of possibilities or we open the door to the unknown and greet what's in there - God, aliens, spaghetti monsters, etc.). I could be wrong though, that's just the brainchild of me thinking away.

To me, it's quite the opposite. The 'everyday' world with its 19th century view of physics - objects, forces, and space - makes no sense to me and falls apart when you examine a bit too closely. This is what gave rise to the relativistic and quantum revolutions.And you only have to spend an hour with a good Mandlebrot Set viewer to understand the staggering levels of complexity that can arise from the most simple of mathematics. Have you ever done this? Yes, why not? But to me it speaks more to an Architect (re the Matrix) than a Christian-type deity. I would have thought that omnipotent gods would not be so constrained as to require a creation that is mathematically consistent... Well, it wasn't QFT that sparked Einstein's comment, it was physics in general - but I'm not sure I agree anyway. Our brains are based on the very mathematics that seems to underpin reality. We are one and the same. But that doesn't mean that the understanding is easy

No i have no background in physics/maths, I am a university graduate in intl. economic relations but my general interest life's "existence" leads me to my seemingly unending quest for knowledge(one of the side effects of this is my presence here on EvC). I see your point how under closer examination the classical mechanics fails to explain reality. It just seems so mind-boggling that the interactions of the fields would create a perception of reality in the first place, and then "we"(whatever fake concept lies beneath this rediculous term) with our minds can twist that fake reality even further with our imagination and create a secondary illusion(reality) - e.g. when one is dreaming. This secondary illusion in a world composed of fields is even harder to comprehend(not saying that the primary illusion, that we are able to perceive as so "real"/though that's very subjective as we cannot compare real to more real, as we don't have anything really more real/ is comprehensible to me, maybe you are right and i should see where that "Mandlebrot Set viewer" takes me).
Generally speaking, this will mean that there is fake reality into a fake reality(or if not really fake, then it's viewable only when conditions are 1 to near infinity and provided there's the highly specific aparatus for that) and we are certain that the secondary reality does not exist.
But then without the primary illusion, the fields cannot really exist in the first place, so do they really exist(aren't they the fruit of the same illusion that's giving rise to our perception of reality)?Cavediver, with regards to the Universe being just fields and its interactions, doesn't it bother you that the manifestation of the fields interaction is so finely tuned? It puzzles my mind, to say the least(but maybe it's because of my general ignorance).
To my feeble mind the outcome of these interactions seems quite inconceiveable(ie the matrix seems quite unreal).How is it possible in a material world that the deeper we go into reductionism, the less chance of findig a "real" particle there is?If we live in a place that's nowhere near really being a 'place', we're made of stuff that's nowhere near really being 'stuff' and what we see is only a small part of what's really there, matter, time, dimensions and the Universe appear totally unreal. And to make things even more bizarre, for some fucking reason, the Universe is exactly preset to make our pathetic existence and cognition possible.
How real is this? How can this even be remotely real?I stare at the mirror and see someone(a body) that my pathetic mind tells me should be "me" But if for some reason my pathetic brain gets "confused"(mental disorder, schizophrenia) it can see that same "me" as some other, different "me". And I know people who claim to have seen God, ghosts, aliens. But in a reality that does not exist at all, who's the sick one? We with our "reality" or the madman with his different "reality"?
Isn't science going to run into infinities of human incomprehensivess? Or is all science going to do - prove that we are players in some entity's sick game?
And ultimately - how does science think all this can be UNcaused?Last question, sorry - can a software programme be aware of the computer running it; is our research in the field pointless?(provied you believe that some entity fine tuned the fields to create our illusion of life) Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

I have an idea, it's a quite simple one but i don't really know if i'll be able to relay my thoughts properly, nor do i know if I will make sense to anyone but me. Anyway, my head hurts with the idea of gods and deities in our illusionary reality and I will try(most probably in vain) to shut the door as much as possible on them(so they don't show their ugly faces).I'll try and marry our perception of "reality" and whatever is causing it with science instead of deities(as if it were possible with my tiny pathetic mind - feel free to correct me if i go wrong along the post, it's just a simple idea arising off the little knowledge i have about physics).Let's go forward in future, not a few years, nor 100s, but billion years. The universe grows larger and colder. After 5 bln years the Sun will go out, after another 100 billion years all the stars will have died out, the universe would plounge into complete darkness. Another 15 billion years pass by in cold, dark meaningless existence. Wait long enough and basic particles like protons will start to decay(estimated a thousand billion times longer than the age of the Universe). Dead cold planets like earth will vanish completely, followed by black holes(although their nature is not well known given enough time they will go too). So in 10¹⁵⁶ years from now, we would see a completely empty universe, emptied in accordance with E=M.C.C(their mass converted to energy). All that there will be is cold, almost empty darkness(just the occasional popping of particles in and out of existence).Now wait and wait and wait and wait... ETERNITY is on your side. Wait... and wait... approaching eternity all kinds of bizzare, strange phenomena should start to appear - partilces will spring into and out of existence, occasionally, after another 10⁵⁰ years whole atoms and molecules will emerge of the vacuum. Give it more time -10¹⁴⁴ years and a bigger "oscillation" will appear. As you approach eternity EVERYTHING can and will happen - wait 10²⁰⁶ and the universe will spit out somewhere the wrist watch of Stalin, the body of Saddam Hussein or another copy of yourself(remember we are talking true Eternity, however hard that maybe to swallow). Give it enough time and our beloved Big Bang will appear out of nowhere setting the famous fields in motion that led to this bizzare, unreal and unexisting thing we label "reality".History will proceed as we know it from the textbooks, we will feel reality as we do now, there will be a guy on EvC forum sitting till 3.30am relaying empty thoughts about eternity and enjoying the OMNI-harmonious dance of the fields that bring about the notion of the magic we call reality.So where do you stand - Eternity or Deity(there could be another cause as well)? What's easier to swallow? It's pretty bizzare to say the least but we are not looking for the cause of the existence of the universe in the grocery store, are we?EDIT: Eternity is pretty much a mathematical concept and we have no evidence to suspect it might truly exist beyond our human imagination. Even if it did, it still leaves the question open - how is Eternity possible in a material world like ours and it still leaves the door partly open to gods. But if science considers eternity possible and bases meta-physical assumptions around it's potential existence, then why couldn't we? Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Giant mess of God knows what "hidden", etc.Edited by Admin, : Replace huge numbers with exponential notation.Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Fixed up formatting more by adding more blank lines. Unhid original message and hid my previously added by edit note.Edited by Admin, : Fix one of the exponentials.

I don't know what your excuse is for posting that pile of garbage, but don't ever do it again.Also, learn the value of the "Preview" button. Using it lets you look at the then version of your message, and lets you do changes before it is submitted. It saves on having all those "Edited by" messages at the bottom of your messages.And don't reply to this message, or you will get suspended.Adminnemooseus

---

Yeah great, if you had heard of a term "Spontaneous creation and annihilation of matter" in quantum mechanics, you wouldn't have so hastily deleted my message. If a singularity that leads to our universe' existence can pop into existence out of the vaccuum/nothingness, why do you think nothing else could, that's made of the same/similar particles?
On what grounds would you denounce the observed "Spontaneous creation and annihilation of matter"? On what physics/science grounds do you label the post I made "garbage"? Because you did not understand it? GREAT. Why don't you go ahead and delete all the threads about the singularity - its existence would simply mean nothing but "garbage" to you.
Go ahead and ban me(especially if it gives you a feeling of being god for a while, on a predominantly atheistic forum), i am not here at all costs and it's not my purpose in life.

Moose, you may want to look up terms such as Poincaré Recurrence and Boltzmann Brains - just because you think something looks like nonsense, does not meean that it is - unless you want to join the ranks of Buzsaw and co. in your approach to theoretical physics?Agobot's post had hideous typesetting (needs to learn to use exponents) but otherwise was merely mildly off-topic, and raised exteremely relevant points to the core EvC agenda that we haven't actually discussed before (not that I can remember anyway) here at EvC.Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.

While waiting for your suspension to expire, go and check out Mandelbrot sets. Here's a great Youtube reverse zoom:
This is just one timy glimpse at the Mandelbrot set and its complexity. Check out Wikipedia to see just how the most simple mathematics gives rise to more "complexity" than we usually see in the entire Universe.I have created videos of zooming in on the Mandelbrot set, that magnify it by billions of times more than magnifying an atom to the size of the observable Universe, and yet the complexity remains...ABE:I challenge anyone to claim that beauty, art, complexity, life, etc cannot arise from naturalistic processes, when the above is just one miniscule example of the power of the natural. There is more magic in the natural world than in the sum total of every deity ever imagined.Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.