#1

When the volume of a given sample is 0, will the mass also be 0?

#2

When the volume of a given sample is 0, will the mass also be 0?

If the volume is zero it does not exist and therefore would have no mass.

#3

You can't have a volume of zero, unless it's nonexistent.

Unless you're in Quantum physics, in which it's a different story, but I'm assuming you're not.

Unless you're in Quantum physics, in which it's a different story, but I'm assuming you're not.

#4

Yes, unless you're talking about very advanced quantum physics and singularities.

EDIT: ^ beaten to it.

EDIT: ^ beaten to it.

#5

Ya it might be a trick question...the answer is either "yes" or "no, because it does not exist"

#6

Yes, unless you're talking about very advanced quantum physics and singularities.

EDIT: ^ beaten to it.

Silly uberphreak, you cannot beat me to a science question.

#7

haha alright i have to make a graph plotting the points of different masses (on the y axis) and volumes (on the x axis) of metals. and it says "Decide whether to include the point 0,0 on your graph. (When the volume of a sample is 0, is the mass also 0?)"

so i dont know if I am suppose to include the point 0,0 in the graphs or not

so i dont know if I am suppose to include the point 0,0 in the graphs or not

#8

haha alright i have to make a graph plotting the points of different masses (on the y axis) and volumes (on the x axis) of metals. and it says "Decide whether to include the point 0,0 on your graph. (When the volume of a sample is 0, is the mass also 0?)"

so i dont know if I am suppose to include the point 0,0 in the graphs or not

From a logical standpoint, if you have 0, you have a reference point.

#9

When the volume of a given sample is 0, will the mass also be 0?

First of all how can a material sample have 0 volume ? Even an electron that is considered massless has a volume that equals a percentage of a picometer. But an object with 0 volume, or to put it more vividly, that occupies a theoretical point with no area on a x, y, z frame is a priori non existant and therefore mass less.

Bottom point is that a massless material sample can have a volume other than zero, and with the obscure nature of quantum physics It wouldn't suprise me the existence of particles with negative volume (imagine that ha?), while the opposite is excluded by one of the primary axioms of physics. For example, in the case of the electron, it's volume is caused by it's electric negative charge and not by it's mass. Hell even every quark, then hadron and then big scale every day objects gains in essence volume by the electroweak forces between the elementary particles, the quarks and the leptons so it forcely occupies "place" around it by forcing other objects not entering it's field. That's why for example we have objects with theoretically infinite volume like black holes or more strikingly the big bang.

#10

so in other words, it's impossible to have a volume of 0, BUT if something did have a volume of 0 it's mass would be 0 as well. So I should include it in my graphs. Right?

#11

Silly uberphreak, you cannot beat me to a science question.

I can try!

Sooo... *reads your title thing* you really have a PhD? In what?

#12

From a logical standpoint, if you have 0, you have a reference point.

wouldnt it just be on the center of the graph?

regardless of the technicalities of it?

#13

so in other words, it's impossible to have a volume of 0, BUT if something did have a volume of 0 it's mass would be 0 as well. So I should include it in my graphs. Right?

Tricky to give an affirmate answer. If for instance you have a quantity of Energy, it's volume will of course be 0. But as for the mass, old buddy Albert would say it has a mass that equals m = E / c^2.

There you go. Zero volume, other than zero (potential) mass.

#14

a more important science question: Is bread a liquid?

#15

a more important science question: Is bread a liquid?

#16

I just thought of something...what if the object is 2 dimensions. It therefore has no volume, but it may have mass. right? Dammit alex, your Einstein talk got my mind goin...i just put it away too

#17

I just thought of something...what if the object is 2 dimensions. It therefore has no volume, but it may have mass. right? Dammit alex, your Einstein talk got my mind goin...i just put it away too

another fun thing to think about: how does a 2 dimensional organism's digestive system work?

#18

*picture of beer*

i dont get it?

amd btw, i mean like an actual slice of bread D:

#19

i dont get it?

amd btw, i mean like an actual slice of bread D:

http://www.aaccnet.org/meetings/2006/abstracts/o-76.htm

#20

another fun thing to think about: how does a 2 dimensional organism's digestive system work?

I guess it would have only a way in because otherwise it would split into two causing its death and maybe there's a wormhole at the other end connected with our 3-dimensional world that deposits the remains. So that may explain the ghosts phenomenon...