Kinetic Theory Of Matter Questions And Answers Pdf

[Cherie Trojak]

ThisPhysics quiz is called 'Physics - The Kinetic Theory of Matter' and it has been written by teachers to help you if you are studying the subject at senior high school. Playing educational quizzes is one of the most efficienct ways to learn if you are in the 11th or 12th grade - aged 16 to 18.

The kinetic theory of matter is one of the models that scientists use to help them to make sense of the world around them. The word kinetic always suggests something is moving and this theory is about the movement of particles in solids, liquids and gasses. Particles transfer heat energy into kinetic energy. The kinetic theory can explain many properties of the three states of matter and is related to the amount of thermal energy distributed through the particles of an object. The particles in solids, liquids and gasses have different amounts of energy, are arranged differently and move differently too.

The kinetic theory explains why substances freeze and melt, why they boil and condense, and why evaporation causes cooling. It helps to explain why heat can be conducted by solids, how convection occurs in fluids and much more... including why solids cannot be compressed but gasses can. In solids the particles are close together and fixed in place. Their only movement is to vibrate. Because of this, solids have definite shapes which they will keep - unless they are broken or cut. It is very difficult to push the particles in solids any closer together and so they can't be compressed.

In liquids the particles are only a little further apart than in solids, so liquids can't be compressed either. The main difference is that the particles in a liquid are free to move past each other, which is why liquids flow and take up the shape of the container in which they are placed. This movement was something that was first noted in 1827 by botanist Robert Brown. Brown observed that pollen grains floating on water moved around in random directions. It then took about 75 years until Albert Einstein came up with an explanation - water molecules were colliding with and pushing the pollen grains around.

Here's what I mean: let's talk about any cosmological object that is known to have dark matter. Now, that object is moving away from us at a certain velocity, plus, the object might be moving on an axis within itself. So it has a certain kinetic energy ($E=\frac12mv^2$) as seen from our perspective.

I am aware that the formula for kinetic energy that I am using here is an approximation, and is not accurate that the scales that I am talking about. I am simply using it to demonstrate my thought process.

if you make the object move fast enough it will generate a bigger and bigger gravitational field and even eventually turn into a black hole. However this does not happen. The reasons are discussed in several questions, e.g. If a 1kg mass was accelerated close to the speed of light would it turn into a black hole?, so here all I will add is that this is a good example why relativistic mass is a misleading concept that is no longer used outside of the less informed popular science TV programmes.

However kinetic energy will increase the strength of a gravitational field in some circumstances. Suppose you take a ball of cold gas the mass of the Sun and you add energy $E$ to it to heat it up. This increases its mass by an amount $\Delta m = E/c^2$ and does increase the gravitational field. The energy $E$ goes into increasing the kinetic energy of the gas particles in the ball, so in this case increasing kinetic energy does increase the gravity.

It isn't clear from your question which of the two cases you are suggesting - possibly both. A galaxy cluster doesn't get heavier just because it's moving relative to us, so that can't explain dark matter. However if the gas/stars/whatever inside the cluster have appreciable kinetic energies that does add to the mass and that needs to be taken into account.

However it should be obvious that kinetic energy of stuff inside a cluster cannot account for the extra mass or indeed get even close to it. Remember that when we talk about kinetic energy of stuff inside a gravitationally bound object we are in effect talking about its temperature. To get the internal energies high you need to heat the cluster, and long before the extra energy became significant the cluster would simply evaporate.

The clue is in the name - cold dark matter. A working definition of cold here, is that the total energy is roughly equal to the rest mass energy. Or in other words, that the kinetic energy is very small compared with the rest mass energy.

Notice what this means. In this context, what is matter, and what is not, is temperature-dependent and therefore time-dependent! Early in the universe, when the temperature was trillions of degrees and even hotter, the electron was what cosmologists consider radiation. Today, with the universe much cooler, the electron is in the category of matter. In the present universe at least two of the three types of neutrinos are matter, and maybe all three, by this definition; but all the neutrinos were radiation early in the universe. Photons have always been and will always be radiation, since they are massless.

So glad so many are thinking.i a human is a particle. And it goes to the game, the stadium becomes a mass of particles, matter is what we see, we see it as 2 dimension image, we relate depth to it very fast to give us the feel of it

You and everything around you are made of vibrations, and the question to ask is how it is that vibrations can make up matter, without condensation, confinement or substrates. To form matter, what you need is objects with mass and attractive forces between them. The Higgs field assures that some types of wavicles have mass. Other fields, in particular the electromagnetic, gluon and gravitational fields, assure there are attractive forces. These then allow atoms and molecules to form, on up to planets.

The question of why the universe has laws of nature and is a predictable place, one that is well described by relatively simple mathematics, is a profound one. However, it is at heart a metascientific question, not a scientific one.

Suppose someone were to suggest an experiment that would show that there is something that created a gameplan for the universe. That something would clearly not follow the laws of nature of our universe, so a key test of the idea is that the laws of nature are sometimes violated. But that would itself violate the premise of science, making the drawing of a scientific conclusion impossible. Intelligent people would simply end up arguing about the significance of the experiment, some arguing that something beyond the universe had been discovered, and others arguing that it simply means that what we thought were the complete laws of nature were not the full story, and more laws remained to be found.

You lack proof. Photons are energy! We electrical engineers make radio waves (photons). Alternating currents fly off of antennae, continually swapping energy of electric and magnetic fields. It has been proven that light needs no ether medium.

Actually it is energy and *mass* that are closely related according to Einstein. Both are properties of matter, and the relation is mathematical. An analogy would be to confuse a person (matter) with his weight (mass). One is an entity, the other a property of that entity. Are they related? Sure. Are they in the same category? No.

Mass is a property of matter. Think of the following example: You have a certain weight. You and your weight are not the same thing. Rather, weight is a property you have (e.g. like your eye color). You also have mass. The only difference between weight and mass is simply that your weight is a measure of your mass subject to gravitational forces, in other words, measurement of your weight will depend on where in the Universe that measurement is taken.

Fascinating article, thank you. How do matter and energy relate to information? What do you think of the claims made in this article on Wired. According to which matter and energy, or everything really, is information?

really, energy and matter are two mutual relatively working basic things but sure they both are total different. can we convert Energy to Mass as per M=E/C C. Really, No. why ? if we broke particles in more smaller particles, why veri little decay in new separated particles total mass as per E =mc x c. it proven. some people says that particles are very very dence energy in very small space area. but how in reality it is possible to turn Energy into Mass ? no way. no one has never observed any how En ergy convert into Mass. Mass only can increase or decrease or steady. Energy can change Mass in static Mass or moving Mass. but Energy self can never convert itself into Mass. if E=mxcxc is true and proven in experiments. but why M=e/c x c can not done in practical. ?

It is called matter to what exists and constitutes in a real and objective way the bodies that generate immeasurable space.

What is observed is that everything is in motion (dynamic) and that in most of the matter that is perceived, there is the tendency to rest (static). This is the starting point of this analysis.

This observation suggests the existence of matter with one of the two mentioned properties. Dynamic or static. This is a critical issue as it determines a drastic change in the concept of what exists.

According to this notion, matter is not only mass, which weighs, if it is also, what generates movement and is dynamic in all its manifestations.

It is proposed, then, that this that generates the movement, is something to or can legitimately be called matter, one of whose properties is the energy, which is now measured with the work done. Once it acts. To that matter with energy will be called DYNAMIC MATTER, from now on. It is conceived of as that which generates the dynamic and vital forces of nature and as responsible or cause of all the energetic and vital phenomena, and the constitution and behavior of living and dynamic living beings and evolutionary phenomenon.

In the same way, mass is recognized with matter with inertia, so it opposes the change of motion and the movement itself. To this matter with inertia will be called STATIC MATERIA, from now on. It is conceived of as generating the static and opposing forces of life in nature and as responsible or cause of the totality of inert phenomena and contrary to life, and the construction and behavior of beings antagonistic to life, And the evolutionary phenomenon. It also possesses the property of being extensive.

Dynamic matter and static matter are not created or destroyed.

Electromagnetic radiation is considered to be predominantly dynamic matter, that is, it can be an aesthetic portion and radiation consisting of particles with mass, contains the static component that comes from the mass.

The property of rest generation is exclusive of static matter. This generates the rest, putting itself at rest and preventing the movement of that which surrounds it and which it can retain.

These latter two properties are contradictory to each other and constitute the causal root of universal contradiction. They do not coexist in the same atom.

Each atom has as attribute or property one or the other of these two properties.

This formulation of the properties of matter follows from the principles of conservation, inasmuch as matter has been uncreated, it has always been as it is today. That is, their fundamental properties must have the quality of immutable, or as it is mentioned in the language of the Physics, they are invariants against the time and with respect to transformations of all type, if they were described with respect to a frame reference. On the other hand, in its temporal temporal evolution, its manifestation changes according to the environment, the concrete circumstance in which the atoms are found, and the level of evolutionary integration that it has reached.

Thus matter has two fundamental properties, spatial property and the property of general movement, the dynamic matter or the property of generating rest static matter. The minimum component of matter, the atom, not the atom of the chemical element, turns out to be an entity impenetrable at very short distances and penetrable at great distances, is able to exert forces outside itself, and to associate with other atoms under Certain conditions. The dynamic and static properties of generating movement or rest respectively are the causal root of the essence or nature of the corresponding atoms or corresponding matter.

Vzquez-Reyna, Mario (1998). Reflexiones en torno la materia, la energa y la masa. Anexo B. Cd. de Mxico. ISBN 970-91797-1-3

3a8082e126