Cool, interesting, nice response (much better than RH's) but just to double check is it that scientists haven't proven the existence of indivisible units of matter (by that I mean in sheer size, not units of matter that can't be broken up into different components) or just haven't proven the existence of certain named ones that are believed to possess certain properties?
much better than RH's
My initials are RN.
Using 'RH' is incorrect because you are using the wrong letters.
I did not read your post very carefully, I keyed in on certain words (like the misused word 'whom'😉 and responded to those.
A better response would inform you that they have not yet (to my knowledge) found an indivisible particle. Dalton's model of the atom is defunct. We know about quarks and (maybe?) string theory would say that's where the progression stops, but I don't actually know.
Can I ask why you are interested in an indivisible particle?
Originally posted by Red Nemesis
My name is Red Nemesis.My initials are R[b]N
.
Using 'RH' is incorrect because you are using the wrong letters.I did not read your post very carefully, I keyed in on certain words (like the misused word 'whom'😉 and responded to those.
A better response would inform you that they have not yet (to my knowledge) found an indivisible particle. Dalton's model of the atom is defunct. We know about quarks and (maybe?) string theory would say that's where the progression stops, but I don't actually know.
Can I ask why you are interested in an indivisible particle? [/B]
I find them fascinating!
My fascination first began with my philosophical musings of the very core (indivisible) components of the Universe (which, assuming that I can trust what my senses are telling me, and that my thought processes are functioning properly, I have narrowed down to time, space, thought, matter, and reasoning/causality), and then the very core forms of those components, as well as the concept of infinity, and more recently it was when I was reading up on linear asymptotes. A linear asymptote is essentially a curve that gets closer and closer to a straight line but never actually touches it and tends towards an infinite value. Which is assuming that there is no such thing as an indivisible measurement of matter/space/distance and that you could divide the distance between the curve and the line at any given point an indefinite number of times.
Whatever it was a tiny bit random but I was just curious.
Originally posted by Red Nemesis
I'm not sure I like thatinterrogative sentencephrase, or anysentencequery containing the contraction 'wasn't.'Observe:
Was not it?
Also:
Wasn't the Cubs game Thursday?
Becomes:
Was not the Cubs game Thursday?It sounds archaic and stilted.
Boo! Go back to the smart internets!!!1!1
*throws chips and bytes*
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsallno because you are obviously still posting.
What shit threads did I make? This one WASN'T MADE BY ME, neither was the eclipse one, the Vader and Ben/Leia/Jedi Master threads aren't spite either.But seriously guys: I'm trying to be the peacemaker here and be nice to everyone. Can't you guys just let it go?
lol our time zones are totally opposite. When i sleep you guys post and vice-vercea.
Scientists have yet to prove the existence of an indivisible unit of matter , nor have they actually split one yet. The theory that particles can be split further and further exists because it's the only explanation of how matter appeared in the universe( except the existence of God theory).
Dunno too much about it either.
And yeah, asymptotes are mathematical concepts present in graphs, but one could tie them to the inexistence of indivisible measurements.
It seems you really like phisics.