… and then named all the dinosaurs, then cloud types, then helpfully pointed out there are actually 6 states of matter and named described each of them…
when you learn enough about physics you realize theres really only two phases of matter. electrons attached and electrons not attached. most of the ones people think about are varying flavors of electrons attached.
Okay, so, just like how the idea of there being “7 continents” is virtually meaningless under Plate Tectonics, so too do the traditional states of matter no longer apply under new understandings of astrophysics, high- and low- temperature physics, and advanced materials science. Consider: what most people think of as “solid” is really just “crystalline”: repeating structures of atoms bound together in a lattice which act as a rigid body. However, glass is not crystalline. Shouldn’t “glass” be a different state of matter, since it operates under some of the properties of solids, and some of the properties of liquids?Also, solids can flow, even crystalline solids (consider the mantle, or dislocation creep). Also, what about when salt dissolves into water, and the ions dissociate? Does “aqueous” count as a state of matter? How about what happens when you go above the curie temperature of a magnet? That phase transition completely changes the physical state of the material, and in a way that is arguably much more profound than going between the phases of minerals, such as between Andalusite and Kyanite.
How about superconductors? Fermionic condensates are in a unique state, and are composed of matter, but are distinct from bose-einstein condensates.
Neutronium is another excellent case. Neutron stars are made of matter, but they act closer to a single, multiple-mile-wide atomic nucleus, rather than just a bunch of neutrons. Degenerate matter is definitely its own thing.
So, the point is: the very idea of "states of matter " is only useful for certain problems, but breaks down quickly upon advanced inspection. My guess would be that the original commenter is presumably counting “aqueous” as a state of matter, but really, once you get any further than “plasma, gas, liquid, solid”, the categorical breakdown stops making sense, since you get too many exceptions.
… and then named all the dinosaurs, then cloud types, then helpfully pointed out there are actually 6 states of matter and named described each of them…
when you learn enough about physics you realize theres really only two phases of matter. electrons attached and electrons not attached. most of the ones people think about are varying flavors of electrons attached.
Thats like saying all colours are either blue or not blue. Not the most useful distinction, even if technically correct
No
There’s BEC at the low temp end and quark-gluon plasma at the high temp end
what are the electrons up to in those?
Wait, 6? Plasma, condensate… What’s the sixth?
Okay, so, just like how the idea of there being “7 continents” is virtually meaningless under Plate Tectonics, so too do the traditional states of matter no longer apply under new understandings of astrophysics, high- and low- temperature physics, and advanced materials science. Consider: what most people think of as “solid” is really just “crystalline”: repeating structures of atoms bound together in a lattice which act as a rigid body. However, glass is not crystalline. Shouldn’t “glass” be a different state of matter, since it operates under some of the properties of solids, and some of the properties of liquids?Also, solids can flow, even crystalline solids (consider the mantle, or dislocation creep). Also, what about when salt dissolves into water, and the ions dissociate? Does “aqueous” count as a state of matter? How about what happens when you go above the curie temperature of a magnet? That phase transition completely changes the physical state of the material, and in a way that is arguably much more profound than going between the phases of minerals, such as between Andalusite and Kyanite.
How about superconductors? Fermionic condensates are in a unique state, and are composed of matter, but are distinct from bose-einstein condensates.
Neutronium is another excellent case. Neutron stars are made of matter, but they act closer to a single, multiple-mile-wide atomic nucleus, rather than just a bunch of neutrons. Degenerate matter is definitely its own thing.
So, the point is: the very idea of "states of matter " is only useful for certain problems, but breaks down quickly upon advanced inspection. My guess would be that the original commenter is presumably counting “aqueous” as a state of matter, but really, once you get any further than “plasma, gas, liquid, solid”, the categorical breakdown stops making sense, since you get too many exceptions.
Nature cares little for boxes and borders. I pity biologists trying to taxonomically classify life most of all.
Yes, that’s one of the main reasons I like chemistry: the periodic table works pretty damn well, with few ways to really break it… yet
Solid
Liquid
Gas
Plasma (normal)
Bose-Einstein Condensate
Quark-gluon plasma
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_matter
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_(matter)
Nonclassical States: Amorphous Solid, Plastic Crystal, Liquid Crystal, Copolymer
Magnetically Ordered states: transition metal, quantum spin liquid.
Superfluids and condensates: Bose-Einsteincondensate, fermionic condensate
High-energy states: Degenerate matter, Quantum Chromodynamic (QCD) Matter, Color-glass condensate, very high energy states
Proposed: Supersolid, String-net liquid, superglass, chain-melted state, quantum hall effect, photonic matter,
Time crystals
Bafflement ;P