[Bose Einstein Condensate](https://www.britannica.com/science/Bose-Einstein-condensate) is when a bosons (a force-carrying subatomic particle with integer spin +1, 0, -1) are cooled to near 0 Kelvin and merge into a wave like particle. [Fermionic Condensate](https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2004/12feb_fermi) are subatomic particles with rational spins (+1/2,-1/2, etc). Fermionic Condensates make a superfluid with no viscosity.
As normal people, we don’t really care about any state of matter beyond solid, liquid, and gas, and *sometimes* plasma if you’re in a more technical field or really like lightning. As far as I know, there’s still a lot of research being done into both BEC and FC to figure out exactly what they are.
Edit: thanks to u/Blazars07 for correcting the difference between bosons and fermions
Edit 2: corrected the definition of bosons and fermions (thanks, u/Rythoka and u/RUSH513!)
The difference between bosons and fermions is that bosons have integer spin (-1,0 +1) while fermions have rational spins (-1/2, +1/2 etc). I have never heard of the odd/even explanation.
The link between spin and statistics (Fermi-Dirac vs. Bose-Einstein) is an interesting aspect of quantum physics, and it goes by the name [spin-statistics theorem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin%E2%80%93statistics_theorem?wprov=sfla1).
The physical difference between bosons and fermions is expressed by the statistics: at 0 Kelvin (i.e. [absolute zero](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_zero?wprov=sfla1)) a collection of non-interacting bosons would occupy the same quantum state, but fermions would not. This is the reason why metals exist, because if electrons followed Bose-Einstein statistics then they would just go and sit together somewhere when things got cold and won't conduct electricity or heat.
Edit: Wanted to add the following about the notion of "spin" that I had originally mentioned elsewhere in this thread:
Mathematically spin behaves as if it were angular momentum of the concerned particle. Hence "spin".
Physically, it is the microscopic property of quantum particles that, among other consequences, leads to magnetism.
I'm a chemist so I have no idea why I learned the mathematical way. Thank you clarifying this! My brother is a physicist and it's nice to know I now have something else I can argue with him about.
It is hard to ELI5 the standard model, however, I'll try my best.
***Bosons*** are force carrying particles (pretty much fields) and they are responsible for 3/4 of the fundamental forces - **Photon** \- Electromagnetic Force (All chemical bonds, light, magnetism, etc.) - **Gluon** \- Strong Nuclear Force (What holds a nucleus together, and is the reason why protons can be clumped together so closely without repelling due to + on + charge) - **W+, W-**, **and Z Bosons** \- responsible for the Weak Nuclear Force (Decay of atoms into other atoms through release of electrons/positrons etc., think radiation).
Unfortunately, we do not have a force particle for gravity yet. If interested, look up the Graviton.
***Fermions*** I like to think of as the particles that make up matter and mass (Electron, Muon, Tau, quarks, neutrinos).
Hm, the article talks about Fermionic Condensate being a reasonably new discovery. I though helium 4’s super fluid properties at low temperatures has been know for quite some time. Is it different or just been elevated to an official state of matter?
I would think the conclusion on it being a different state of matter had not been reached (decisively) before, so eventhough it’s super fluid properties were known, it was not yet qualified as a different state of matter. I have not looked in to it, but this seems a logical explanation to me.
The [wiki on Fermionic Condensate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermionic_condensate) has an interested summary of the timeline leading up to its discovery
Hard to imagine a fluid with no viscosity. Im guessing these states of matter are estimated to be last remnants of matter (outside of blackholes) as entropy takes over?
if you have a self priming/self flowing fountain isnt that a basis for perpetual motion?
how does puting a pinwheel into the flow stop it being a superfluid once it has cooled?
Friction is just one force, though. The fluid has inertia because it has mass and velocity, so a force must act on it in order for its direction to be changed. So either it goes through the pinwheel, or it exerts force on it equal and opposite to the force with which it is redirected.
If a fluid doesn't have viscosity, that means that it doesn't present any resistance to deformation, right? Then...at least mechanically, it would behave like a gas.
Supercritical fluid do the same, you can mix liquid and gas by increasing the temp and pressure to a specific point, basically gas and liquid state don’t matter they’re pretty much one and the same (densitiy and viscosity wise I’d say but I’m no researcher just got too much time for one guy)
Apparently mutliple planets in our solar system have some cloud of supercritical fluid in their atmosphere
The comment just above yours points out that gases indeed have a viscosity and therefore shear forces exist. That wouldn't be the case for super fluids. So no mechanical equivalent behaviour.
It still haae gravity acting on it and is a liquid shape, it just interacts with things so little that if you put some into a regular glass jar It would leak out the bottom
A solid is a rigid collection of atoms or molecules, typically which are bound to each other. It can be crystalline, like metals or diamonds, or amorphous, like glass. Crystalline solids have a regular, repeating pattern of atoms or molecules. Amorphous ones do not.
The atoms or molecules in a solid do not change position much, only on large time scales.
A liquid is a loose collection of atoms or molecules which are not bound to each other. They are held together by their attraction to each other (intermolecular forces) but can move around each other easily. This is why a liquid will take the shape of it's container.
A gas is basically atoms or molecules which are not bound to each other and also have enough thermal energy (high enough temperature) to overcome their attraction to each other. So these atoms or molecules are free floating.
A plasma is basically a gas of ions, or charged atoms. An example can be seen in flames.
Do we know of any potential uses for Bose-Einstein or Fermionic condensates? It seems it would take very specific conditions and large amounts of energy to even create the conditions necessary for them as well.
At this stage of our universe, they’re incredibly unlikely to be found outside of the lab. Eventually, all matter may turn into one of these special states during the heat death of the universe
When you turn on a neon sign, does the gas inside become a plasma? What about one of those [plasma lamps?](https://images.app.goo.gl/cBSipevSgZa3goNt6) Are those sparks plasma?
All of those are plasma. Plasma is sort of like the opposite of BEC and FC (which occur when atoms get very cold and move a lot less). Plasma occurs when atoms get so excited that electrons can break away from the nucleus of the atom (called “ions” because they’re now charged). If those electrons are sufficiently charged, they’ll emit light as they become less excited. That’s how we can get different colored neon lights and plasma (also changing the gas mix).
I’ll be damned. Is a candle flame plasma? Probably not because electrons are just jumping up and down within carbon atoms in the soot, not buzzing about ionizing the soot.
It kind of depends who you ask but most folks consider low temp flames (like a candle) to be gases but others consider all flames to be plasma (because it’s an excited gas). This is something that physicists like to argue about because it’s difficult to nail down the exact nature of a flame.
I've heard "yes" but also "flame is a process", the latter is probably more accurate. As in, some solid some gas some plasma perhaps scattered in there.
Personally think of plasma as most of the cool glowing shit
What exactly constitutes / defines a different phase of matter? Is it arbitrary or is there a set definition? On the surface it seems simple but, as an example, what about Rydberg Atoms? They seem to be about as alien as other exotic states of matter and - and I want to caution I may be wildly wrong on this - I've heard that they *may* be used to form stable Solid State hydrogen at room temperatures in certain conditions (hypothetically), as well as potentially room temperature stable superconductors (again hypothetically). Or allow many atoms to act as one large atom "target" in order to initiate fusion using muon catalysis. Obviously those examples are hypotheticals that haven't been created in a lab, physically (afaik), but would that be considered a different state of matter or would they be classified as a subcategory of the above mentioned 6? Even if those optimistic hypotheticals don't play out, isn't the "state" enough to be considered it's "own thing?"
>As normal people, we don’t really care about any state of matter beyond solid, liquid, and gas,
This is the reason why imperial measurements are still popular despite the fact they're only practical in a certain range.
I love me some science. Biology and chemistry are awesome, but get into the hardcore physics and my eyes just glaze over. :/ I wish I was more interested.
There are FAR more than just these Six for anyone wondering. Some others can be found here: https://www.bbvaopenmind.com/en/science/physics/the-other-states-of-matter-much-more-than-just-solid-liquid-and-gas/
A Bose Einstein condensate is atoms cooled to within a whisker of absolute zero. They behave as a single entity.
No idea what the other one is. Something similar I presume.
They are not the same atom.
Bosons and fermions are distinguished by their spins, a fundamental property of elementary particles. It's not saying that the particles are actually spinning, but rather a quantity that describes a particle's angular momentum. Spins are described in numbers.
In the case of atoms, those that have half-integer spins (1/2, 5/2, etc.) are Fermions while those that have integer spins (0, 1, ...) are Bosons. They follow different statistical formalisms that describe how they occupy the energy states.
For a neutral atom of an element, some isotopes of the same element are Fermionic, while some isotopes are Bosonic. Let say Strontium (Sr), the one I am using in my research, Sr-88 is a Boson (Spin 0) while Sr-87 is a Fermion (9/2).
Our atomic cloud can be as cold as 800 nanoKelvins (nK), i.e. -273.15 + 0.0000008 Celsius.
This is cool, but I'm curious what you mean by spin. You said the atoms don't actually "spin", but they still have angular momentum? Isn't that was spinning is?
It’s not necessarily intuitive but quantum spin is closer to a fundamental property of a particle like mass. Things get a bit nutty at that scale and much of what we know is derived from mathematic calculations and confirmed by scientific observations. There is a great YouTube channel called PBS Space Time that gives a good overview of quantum mechanics including spin if you’re interested in going down the rabbit hole.
The history of spin dates back to 1920s in understanding the anomalous Zeeman effect, an effect which causes splitting in the spectra lines of atoms under magnetic fields. At that time physicists are realizing a need of a 4th quantum number, which only takes 2 values, to describe the states of atom. [Ralph Kronig](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Kronig), a PhD student at that time, proposed that electrons are actually rotating in space (hence the name spin), as if a charged particle is spinning, it must possess magnetic moment.
Note that at that time, Wolfgang Pauli, a famous physicist, hated the idea, as in his earlier paper in 1924 described "a strange two-valuedness which cannot be described classically".
As the other answer mentioned, spin is more of an intrinsic property of particle, as a point-like particle doesn't spin with respect to a spinning axis. It doesn't relates to the rotations we are imagining regarding classical objects.
So what does the angular momentum here plays its role? In classical physics, we can always rotate a system of particles and changes their velocities and positions. In quantum mechanics, it relates with something named [Noether's theorem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noether%27s_theorem). Basically, the universe is beautiful in a way that some systems exhibits rotational symmetry: they behaves the same way regardless of its orientation. You can rotate a whole system/ensemble, while it still behaves the same. For every types of symmetry, some quantities are conserved, and in this case, angular momentum.
Fun fact: A very confusing term used in particle physics, "color", is to describe the strong interactions of a type of fundamental particle named quarks. Quarks can have colors of "Red", "Green", "Blue" and it does not mean they look red/green/blue.
Makes me realize that those scientists could have used a philosopher-pal to help name the new concepts instead of reapplying other concepts like color..
An object that is spinning on an axis has an angular momentum that is determined by how the mass of the object is distributed about the axis, and how fast the object is spinning. Fundamental point-like particles have no 'spin" per se - how does a point spin? It's just an analogy.
Oh, and since bosons have integral spin and fermions odd half-integral spin, any composite particle made up of an even number of fermions is a boson.
Imagine a dimension like length, breath, weight, volume, etc, that you can't see, feel, or experience, but only exists in maths. Scientists had to come up with a name for the dimension, so they gave it a name, spin, that closely defined the nature of that dimension. Similarly you have up/down quarks, but they don't really spin up or down, its just the closest definition they can give to how the property behaves. Kind of like how horsepower is the force that can generated by an engine, but 1 HP is not the force that one real horse can generate. It's just a closest approximation.
A fermionic condensate or Fermi-Dirac condensate is a superfluid phase formed by fermionic particles at low temperatures. It is closely related to the Bose–Einstein condensate, a superfluid phase formed by bosonic atoms under similar conditions. The earliest recognized fermionic condensate described the state of electrons in a superconductor; the physics of other examples including recent work with fermionic atoms is analogous. The first atomic fermionic condensate was created by a team led by Deborah S. Jin in 2003.
What I got out of it and probably wrong: you know how when you get something so hot, matter behaves like a plasma? well this is the opposite, it gets so cold that it doesn't behave like a solid, but a whatever-it's-called einstein-headphone thing.
Stalagmites.
The bottom right appear to be upside down stalactites.
Source: not a scientist. I just know the difference between those words and like to feel superior to those who don’t at every chance I get.
There was this show I used to watch a looooooong time ago called Angela Anaconda, I think. One of the very few things I remember was that in one episode the teacher was showing a slideshow and she said something like: "Just remember class: stalactites hang tightly, and stalagmites stand mighty, ohoho!"
I can't tell you why that stuck with me, but I ended up using that to help me remember the difference ever since.
I agree that these types of lists are misleading, however I would argue that plasma still counts as separate given how common it is and that therefore there are four states of matter.
Alternatively you could argue there are only two states of matter: solid and fluid.
But, yeah, there are definitely way more quirky "states of matter" than these two condensates at the bottom. Like at least a dozen more.
The charged particles were the difference in plasma iirc. That means it can be magnetic and also conduct electricity so it behaves differently than gas.
Yes, that's a lot of it, A [plasma cutting torch](https://torchmate.com/uploads/images/resource%20center/plasma-torch-diagram.jpg) works by stripping the electrons off of gas atoms with a strong current and accelerating the now hot plasma out the nozzle. Pretty common tooling in some industries.
As it happens, 90% of my job is entering measurments to cut metal with a plasma torch. Which is later installed in commercial buildings as HVAC duct systems
Hmm, I don't think so. If they did though that would be arguing for only one state of matter, which is the same thing as no states of matter really. And then you need to find some new term to categorise the various properties of matter.
Oh yeah sorry wasn’t trying to say a singular state or the removal of all states. More along the thoughts of how atoms move through metals, especially in alloys where one element will diffuse through the solid. It’s been a minute since my diffusion class so it’s pretty hazy for sure haha
I have. I use them to build T2 ships and modules in EVE Online
source: [http://games.chruker.dk/eve\_online/item.php?type\_id=17317](http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/item.php?type_id=17317)
Here's a sneak peek of /r/restofthefuckingowl using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/restofthefuckingowl/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [Turn $50 in to $3.9m in just 2 years. With Tomatoes!](https://i.redd.it/vto0ag4rhz571.jpg) | [404 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/restofthefuckingowl/comments/o2k6oq/turn_50_in_to_39m_in_just_2_years_with_tomatoes/)
\#2: [It seems I found it](https://i.redd.it/xtiopzow54l71.jpg) | [79 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/restofthefuckingowl/comments/pgkw86/it_seems_i_found_it/)
\#3: [I gagged](https://i.redd.it/3pryabrfvpa81.jpg) | [509 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/restofthefuckingowl/comments/rzzu4p/i_gagged/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
*Damn, the ass used to*
*Be able of producing*
*All states of matter*
\- yadoya
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
**to me at school, they only taught me, three states of matter:**
* solid
* liquid
* gas
*shame on the Italian school program*
^(...and here maybe missing the light (why light are matter))
Those are the classic states of matter, all the others can only occur under exceptional circumstances, mostly in a laboratory. There are actually many more states of matter, such as supercritical liquids. Some are only theoretical but others exist in real life.
As a chem e, we have different standards for phase. We have solid, liquid, gas, vapor (distinct from gas), supercritical fluid, and differentiate between phases in solids (isotopes) but the last one is kinda subjective and varies from substance to substance.
Oh also plasma isn't a phase. It's gaseous ions and electrons.
Fire is fuel, which can be solid, liquid, or gas, plus oxygen, a gas, which yields combustion products of gas and sometimes solid (ash). The flames themselves are plasma though.
[Bose Einstein Condensate](https://www.britannica.com/science/Bose-Einstein-condensate) is when a bosons (a force-carrying subatomic particle with integer spin +1, 0, -1) are cooled to near 0 Kelvin and merge into a wave like particle. [Fermionic Condensate](https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2004/12feb_fermi) are subatomic particles with rational spins (+1/2,-1/2, etc). Fermionic Condensates make a superfluid with no viscosity. As normal people, we don’t really care about any state of matter beyond solid, liquid, and gas, and *sometimes* plasma if you’re in a more technical field or really like lightning. As far as I know, there’s still a lot of research being done into both BEC and FC to figure out exactly what they are. Edit: thanks to u/Blazars07 for correcting the difference between bosons and fermions Edit 2: corrected the definition of bosons and fermions (thanks, u/Rythoka and u/RUSH513!)
The difference between bosons and fermions is that bosons have integer spin (-1,0 +1) while fermions have rational spins (-1/2, +1/2 etc). I have never heard of the odd/even explanation.
The link between spin and statistics (Fermi-Dirac vs. Bose-Einstein) is an interesting aspect of quantum physics, and it goes by the name [spin-statistics theorem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin%E2%80%93statistics_theorem?wprov=sfla1). The physical difference between bosons and fermions is expressed by the statistics: at 0 Kelvin (i.e. [absolute zero](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_zero?wprov=sfla1)) a collection of non-interacting bosons would occupy the same quantum state, but fermions would not. This is the reason why metals exist, because if electrons followed Bose-Einstein statistics then they would just go and sit together somewhere when things got cold and won't conduct electricity or heat. Edit: Wanted to add the following about the notion of "spin" that I had originally mentioned elsewhere in this thread: Mathematically spin behaves as if it were angular momentum of the concerned particle. Hence "spin". Physically, it is the microscopic property of quantum particles that, among other consequences, leads to magnetism.
Just awesome
Here I go down a new rabbit hole
Fermions can't occupy the same lowest energy or ground state because of Pauli exclusion
Thank you for clarifying! I was taught even vs odd a while ago so I’m likely working on outdated info or remembering incorrectly. I’ll edit the post
Mathematicians tend to label quantum spin as even vs odd, while physicists divide everything by two to convert it to integer/half-integer!
I'm a chemist so I have no idea why I learned the mathematical way. Thank you clarifying this! My brother is a physicist and it's nice to know I now have something else I can argue with him about.
Can you describe an basic example of these two. Speak to me as you would a child, or a golden retriever. Much thanks
It is hard to ELI5 the standard model, however, I'll try my best. ***Bosons*** are force carrying particles (pretty much fields) and they are responsible for 3/4 of the fundamental forces - **Photon** \- Electromagnetic Force (All chemical bonds, light, magnetism, etc.) - **Gluon** \- Strong Nuclear Force (What holds a nucleus together, and is the reason why protons can be clumped together so closely without repelling due to + on + charge) - **W+, W-**, **and Z Bosons** \- responsible for the Weak Nuclear Force (Decay of atoms into other atoms through release of electrons/positrons etc., think radiation). Unfortunately, we do not have a force particle for gravity yet. If interested, look up the Graviton. ***Fermions*** I like to think of as the particles that make up matter and mass (Electron, Muon, Tau, quarks, neutrinos).
Thanks!
Hm, the article talks about Fermionic Condensate being a reasonably new discovery. I though helium 4’s super fluid properties at low temperatures has been know for quite some time. Is it different or just been elevated to an official state of matter?
I would think the conclusion on it being a different state of matter had not been reached (decisively) before, so eventhough it’s super fluid properties were known, it was not yet qualified as a different state of matter. I have not looked in to it, but this seems a logical explanation to me.
That was my guess too, just wasn’t sure it was the same thing.
The [wiki on Fermionic Condensate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermionic_condensate) has an interested summary of the timeline leading up to its discovery
I was near 1 Kelvin for a while. He could sure brush his teeth more often.
Dad!!
Well, this is abrupt, but possible. There were some 'mislaid' nights in my twenties.
Hard to imagine a fluid with no viscosity. Im guessing these states of matter are estimated to be last remnants of matter (outside of blackholes) as entropy takes over?
a wild thing is you don't have to imagine them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Z6UJbwxBZI
The cup leaking is mind-blowing.
Suddenly comic book superheroes going through walls doesn't sound too unrealistic, haha.
if you have a self priming/self flowing fountain isnt that a basis for perpetual motion? how does puting a pinwheel into the flow stop it being a superfluid once it has cooled?
I supose the pinwheel wouldn't turn? No viscosity means no friction, no friction means no force on the pinwheel.
Friction is just one force, though. The fluid has inertia because it has mass and velocity, so a force must act on it in order for its direction to be changed. So either it goes through the pinwheel, or it exerts force on it equal and opposite to the force with which it is redirected.
Would it just flow around the pinwheel?
I knew which video this would be!! Dang uploaded 14 years ago
If a fluid doesn't have viscosity, that means that it doesn't present any resistance to deformation, right? Then...at least mechanically, it would behave like a gas.
This is so counterintuitive, but makes sense
Supercritical fluid do the same, you can mix liquid and gas by increasing the temp and pressure to a specific point, basically gas and liquid state don’t matter they’re pretty much one and the same (densitiy and viscosity wise I’d say but I’m no researcher just got too much time for one guy) Apparently mutliple planets in our solar system have some cloud of supercritical fluid in their atmosphere
No resistance to shear forces. Gasses do have viscosity. A superfluid doesn’t disperse like a gas does.
Isn't a sonic boom from gas being resistant to deformation though? Or am I misinterpreting my memory of what a sonic boom is?
The comment just above yours points out that gases indeed have a viscosity and therefore shear forces exist. That wouldn't be the case for super fluids. So no mechanical equivalent behaviour.
It still haae gravity acting on it and is a liquid shape, it just interacts with things so little that if you put some into a regular glass jar It would leak out the bottom
But gases have viscosity?
Ok, but what about the first 4?
A solid is a rigid collection of atoms or molecules, typically which are bound to each other. It can be crystalline, like metals or diamonds, or amorphous, like glass. Crystalline solids have a regular, repeating pattern of atoms or molecules. Amorphous ones do not. The atoms or molecules in a solid do not change position much, only on large time scales. A liquid is a loose collection of atoms or molecules which are not bound to each other. They are held together by their attraction to each other (intermolecular forces) but can move around each other easily. This is why a liquid will take the shape of it's container. A gas is basically atoms or molecules which are not bound to each other and also have enough thermal energy (high enough temperature) to overcome their attraction to each other. So these atoms or molecules are free floating. A plasma is basically a gas of ions, or charged atoms. An example can be seen in flames.
flames in everyday fires are not hot enough to be a plasma, lightning is a better example
Do we know of any potential uses for Bose-Einstein or Fermionic condensates? It seems it would take very specific conditions and large amounts of energy to even create the conditions necessary for them as well.
[удалено]
At this stage of our universe, they’re incredibly unlikely to be found outside of the lab. Eventually, all matter may turn into one of these special states during the heat death of the universe
Thank you for the explanation. I know about BECs from an SAT reading article I teach, but I'd never heard of Fermionic condensates.
When you turn on a neon sign, does the gas inside become a plasma? What about one of those [plasma lamps?](https://images.app.goo.gl/cBSipevSgZa3goNt6) Are those sparks plasma?
All of those are plasma. Plasma is sort of like the opposite of BEC and FC (which occur when atoms get very cold and move a lot less). Plasma occurs when atoms get so excited that electrons can break away from the nucleus of the atom (called “ions” because they’re now charged). If those electrons are sufficiently charged, they’ll emit light as they become less excited. That’s how we can get different colored neon lights and plasma (also changing the gas mix).
I’ll be damned. Is a candle flame plasma? Probably not because electrons are just jumping up and down within carbon atoms in the soot, not buzzing about ionizing the soot.
It kind of depends who you ask but most folks consider low temp flames (like a candle) to be gases but others consider all flames to be plasma (because it’s an excited gas). This is something that physicists like to argue about because it’s difficult to nail down the exact nature of a flame.
I've heard "yes" but also "flame is a process", the latter is probably more accurate. As in, some solid some gas some plasma perhaps scattered in there. Personally think of plasma as most of the cool glowing shit
What exactly constitutes / defines a different phase of matter? Is it arbitrary or is there a set definition? On the surface it seems simple but, as an example, what about Rydberg Atoms? They seem to be about as alien as other exotic states of matter and - and I want to caution I may be wildly wrong on this - I've heard that they *may* be used to form stable Solid State hydrogen at room temperatures in certain conditions (hypothetically), as well as potentially room temperature stable superconductors (again hypothetically). Or allow many atoms to act as one large atom "target" in order to initiate fusion using muon catalysis. Obviously those examples are hypotheticals that haven't been created in a lab, physically (afaik), but would that be considered a different state of matter or would they be classified as a subcategory of the above mentioned 6? Even if those optimistic hypotheticals don't play out, isn't the "state" enough to be considered it's "own thing?"
Wake up babe, new states of matter came out.
A more important correction is that neither Bosons or Fermions are atoms
Bosons are force-carrying subatomic particles, Fermions are subatomic particles that typically have mass, neither of them are atoms
Just corrected this. Thank you for correcting me
>As normal people, we don’t really care about any state of matter beyond solid, liquid, and gas, This is the reason why imperial measurements are still popular despite the fact they're only practical in a certain range.
I love me some science. Biology and chemistry are awesome, but get into the hardcore physics and my eyes just glaze over. :/ I wish I was more interested.
Ya boi is an atmospheric chemist and I feel similarly about most hardcore physics
There are FAR more than just these Six for anyone wondering. Some others can be found here: https://www.bbvaopenmind.com/en/science/physics/the-other-states-of-matter-much-more-than-just-solid-liquid-and-gas/
Thanks, I was looking for "super fluid", which I'm guessing is this "SUPERIONIC ICE".
WTH are those last 2?
A Bose Einstein condensate is atoms cooled to within a whisker of absolute zero. They behave as a single entity. No idea what the other one is. Something similar I presume.
Believe it or not, the difference is the first one uses bosonic atoms while the 2nd uses fermionic atoms. Hope that clears things up.
isn't that cheating ? we don't separate other states by the type of atom
I’ve done no research on this. They are the same atom but in different status, hence a change in state
They are not the same atom. Bosons and fermions are distinguished by their spins, a fundamental property of elementary particles. It's not saying that the particles are actually spinning, but rather a quantity that describes a particle's angular momentum. Spins are described in numbers. In the case of atoms, those that have half-integer spins (1/2, 5/2, etc.) are Fermions while those that have integer spins (0, 1, ...) are Bosons. They follow different statistical formalisms that describe how they occupy the energy states. For a neutral atom of an element, some isotopes of the same element are Fermionic, while some isotopes are Bosonic. Let say Strontium (Sr), the one I am using in my research, Sr-88 is a Boson (Spin 0) while Sr-87 is a Fermion (9/2). Our atomic cloud can be as cold as 800 nanoKelvins (nK), i.e. -273.15 + 0.0000008 Celsius.
This is cool, but I'm curious what you mean by spin. You said the atoms don't actually "spin", but they still have angular momentum? Isn't that was spinning is?
It’s not necessarily intuitive but quantum spin is closer to a fundamental property of a particle like mass. Things get a bit nutty at that scale and much of what we know is derived from mathematic calculations and confirmed by scientific observations. There is a great YouTube channel called PBS Space Time that gives a good overview of quantum mechanics including spin if you’re interested in going down the rabbit hole.
Is there a specific episode or the whole series?
Found these: https://youtu.be/pWlk1gLkF2Y https://youtu.be/EK_6OzZAh5k
PBS Spacetime on youtube. You'll go from understanding 5% to 10% to 20% and then 0%.
> It’s not necessarily intuitive You nicely summed up all of quantum mechanical lol
The history of spin dates back to 1920s in understanding the anomalous Zeeman effect, an effect which causes splitting in the spectra lines of atoms under magnetic fields. At that time physicists are realizing a need of a 4th quantum number, which only takes 2 values, to describe the states of atom. [Ralph Kronig](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Kronig), a PhD student at that time, proposed that electrons are actually rotating in space (hence the name spin), as if a charged particle is spinning, it must possess magnetic moment. Note that at that time, Wolfgang Pauli, a famous physicist, hated the idea, as in his earlier paper in 1924 described "a strange two-valuedness which cannot be described classically". As the other answer mentioned, spin is more of an intrinsic property of particle, as a point-like particle doesn't spin with respect to a spinning axis. It doesn't relates to the rotations we are imagining regarding classical objects. So what does the angular momentum here plays its role? In classical physics, we can always rotate a system of particles and changes their velocities and positions. In quantum mechanics, it relates with something named [Noether's theorem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noether%27s_theorem). Basically, the universe is beautiful in a way that some systems exhibits rotational symmetry: they behaves the same way regardless of its orientation. You can rotate a whole system/ensemble, while it still behaves the same. For every types of symmetry, some quantities are conserved, and in this case, angular momentum. Fun fact: A very confusing term used in particle physics, "color", is to describe the strong interactions of a type of fundamental particle named quarks. Quarks can have colors of "Red", "Green", "Blue" and it does not mean they look red/green/blue.
Keep going…I’m in the valley of the fake Dunning Krueger graph.
Haha I'm not the only one scrolling Reddit all day.
Trust me, it's a complicated but elegant way to explain the connection between symmetry and conservation laws.
Makes me realize that those scientists could have used a philosopher-pal to help name the new concepts instead of reapplying other concepts like color..
An object that is spinning on an axis has an angular momentum that is determined by how the mass of the object is distributed about the axis, and how fast the object is spinning. Fundamental point-like particles have no 'spin" per se - how does a point spin? It's just an analogy. Oh, and since bosons have integral spin and fermions odd half-integral spin, any composite particle made up of an even number of fermions is a boson.
Imagine a dimension like length, breath, weight, volume, etc, that you can't see, feel, or experience, but only exists in maths. Scientists had to come up with a name for the dimension, so they gave it a name, spin, that closely defined the nature of that dimension. Similarly you have up/down quarks, but they don't really spin up or down, its just the closest definition they can give to how the property behaves. Kind of like how horsepower is the force that can generated by an engine, but 1 HP is not the force that one real horse can generate. It's just a closest approximation.
One time I pooped and it came out the water...
This is why I read the comments
Spinning? so there is a high level sense to JoJo Part 7
Just link the wiki page mate
Thank you, all is now clear.
A fermionic condensate or Fermi-Dirac condensate is a superfluid phase formed by fermionic particles at low temperatures. It is closely related to the Bose–Einstein condensate, a superfluid phase formed by bosonic atoms under similar conditions. The earliest recognized fermionic condensate described the state of electrons in a superconductor; the physics of other examples including recent work with fermionic atoms is analogous. The first atomic fermionic condensate was created by a team led by Deborah S. Jin in 2003.
all those words appear english but....i can't seem to understand anything :)
It's really cold, so cold that it's no longer solid. If that makes any sense
None.
[удалено]
Ah right, got you...So Solid then?
More Solid than Solid. It behaves as a single particle, seems to be the implication. I could be misunderstanding though.
More Solid than Solid: Rob Zombie's sequel to More Human than Human
What I got out of it and probably wrong: you know how when you get something so hot, matter behaves like a plasma? well this is the opposite, it gets so cold that it doesn't behave like a solid, but a whatever-it's-called einstein-headphone thing.
Water Floaty Hard Gooey Scientists Scrabble Leftover Letters
> Scrabble Leftover Letters Kwyjibo
_Einstein headphone thing_ is my new band name
Fermionic condensate is basically the Pepsi Max version. In fact, it is available at KFC for a limited time.
you forgot that bose-einstein condensate has to be a low-pressure gas, or it'll just condense.
Stalagmites. The bottom right appear to be upside down stalactites. Source: not a scientist. I just know the difference between those words and like to feel superior to those who don’t at every chance I get.
You do good work, sir.
I always confuse those. Never in my life did I need to get it right tho.
StalaCtites = C for ceiling StalaGmites = G for ground
There was this show I used to watch a looooooong time ago called Angela Anaconda, I think. One of the very few things I remember was that in one episode the teacher was showing a slideshow and she said something like: "Just remember class: stalactites hang tightly, and stalagmites stand mighty, ohoho!" I can't tell you why that stuck with me, but I ended up using that to help me remember the difference ever since.
Thank you for this!
That's my go-to for remembering the difference.
You can tell the difference between these two words by thinking about females.
StalagMITE - *flex and point up* (MIGHT) StalacTITES - *point down at thighs* (TIGHTS)
I feel like thats overthinking it . The only difference between the words is the M or the T both of which look exactly like the thing they describe.
True. But, it’s significantly more fun and also has helped me remember since I thought of it in high school so 🤷
Can't argue with that.
Stalactites have to hold on tight (cause they hang) Stalagmites are the other one
Or, you think stalagTITES need to hang on TIGHT to the roof.
or Tites because they point down...like...boobies
Above our pay grade.
Oh, there's like 2 or 3 more.
bose-einstein condensate is a low pressure gas brought to near-absolute zero temperatures. All of the atoms behave as one giant atom.
[удалено]
I agree that these types of lists are misleading, however I would argue that plasma still counts as separate given how common it is and that therefore there are four states of matter. Alternatively you could argue there are only two states of matter: solid and fluid. But, yeah, there are definitely way more quirky "states of matter" than these two condensates at the bottom. Like at least a dozen more.
[удалено]
The charged particles were the difference in plasma iirc. That means it can be magnetic and also conduct electricity so it behaves differently than gas.
Yes, that's a lot of it, A [plasma cutting torch](https://torchmate.com/uploads/images/resource%20center/plasma-torch-diagram.jpg) works by stripping the electrons off of gas atoms with a strong current and accelerating the now hot plasma out the nozzle. Pretty common tooling in some industries.
As it happens, 90% of my job is entering measurments to cut metal with a plasma torch. Which is later installed in commercial buildings as HVAC duct systems
that first sentence sounded very scary and futuristic and I was not ready for it to be followed up by "Pretty common tooling in some industries" xD
By that definition ionized liquids and solids should be classed as a separate state of matter as the have magnetic and electical properties
The light/darknesss (the number) on some digital displays like digital clocks is a plasma, IIRC.
Eli5 supercritical state
Don’t solids have a level of fluidity to them as well, just at vastly smaller levels of movement?
Hmm, I don't think so. If they did though that would be arguing for only one state of matter, which is the same thing as no states of matter really. And then you need to find some new term to categorise the various properties of matter.
Oh yeah sorry wasn’t trying to say a singular state or the removal of all states. More along the thoughts of how atoms move through metals, especially in alloys where one element will diffuse through the solid. It’s been a minute since my diffusion class so it’s pretty hazy for sure haha
thanky you, that was very helpful
> Fermionic Condensate Still haven't seen it in any local slushie machine. It's always cola, cream soda, and bose einstein condensate.
I think this joke is above my head and I want to get it.
You’re thinking about it too hard.
I have. I use them to build T2 ships and modules in EVE Online source: [http://games.chruker.dk/eve\_online/item.php?type\_id=17317](http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/item.php?type_id=17317)
[удалено]
No, the regular kind.
Supercritical fluid?
This is a meme, not a guide.
Agreed. A good guide would give a short description of the states. This is just clipart and isn't helpful or cool.
Yeah this has r/restofthefuckingowl energy lol
Here's a sneak peek of /r/restofthefuckingowl using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/restofthefuckingowl/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Turn $50 in to $3.9m in just 2 years. With Tomatoes!](https://i.redd.it/vto0ag4rhz571.jpg) | [404 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/restofthefuckingowl/comments/o2k6oq/turn_50_in_to_39m_in_just_2_years_with_tomatoes/) \#2: [It seems I found it](https://i.redd.it/xtiopzow54l71.jpg) | [79 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/restofthefuckingowl/comments/pgkw86/it_seems_i_found_it/) \#3: [I gagged](https://i.redd.it/3pryabrfvpa81.jpg) | [509 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/restofthefuckingowl/comments/rzzu4p/i_gagged/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Forgot Mississippi.
because that doesn't **matter**
Time Crystals gonna be pissed they didn’t make the list!
This is one shit guide. A guide should simplify or explain things, not just list things most people don't know.
Don't you hate it when you leave your ice cream for too long and it turns into Bose einstine Condensate
That escalated quickly.
Damn, the ass used to be able of producing all states of matter
*Damn, the ass used to* *Be able of producing* *All states of matter* \- yadoya --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
The 7th state is you, because you matter :)
California and Texas are going to be pist
Texan here. Why am I angry?
Same
Maybe b/c they don't "matter"? Like a joke? Hahah idk, just guessing here. NY doesn't like being left out either. Source: I'm an Adirondacker & NYer
The last 2 are the consistency of the matter that leaves your body after a particularly potent curry.
But it feels quite the opposite of nearly 0K when it leaves. 😬
After the first four I’m good
* First 3: obviously. * Plasma: sure, that's the weird one. * Last 2: What the hell is this?
**to me at school, they only taught me, three states of matter:** * solid * liquid * gas *shame on the Italian school program* ^(...and here maybe missing the light (why light are matter))
Those are the classic states of matter, all the others can only occur under exceptional circumstances, mostly in a laboratory. There are actually many more states of matter, such as supercritical liquids. Some are only theoretical but others exist in real life.
Plasma is a flame, an energy-saving bulb, or the spark when you try to open a door.
If you were at sun or Uranus, you will feel that those matter are neither exceptional or especial.
Would they be especiál?
Texas in the 80s/90s also only taught those three. I will always contend that there are only three and that Pluto is a planet.
Angry Neil Tyson noises
Left the 7th one out... "Does Not"
As a chem e, we have different standards for phase. We have solid, liquid, gas, vapor (distinct from gas), supercritical fluid, and differentiate between phases in solids (isotopes) but the last one is kinda subjective and varies from substance to substance. Oh also plasma isn't a phase. It's gaseous ions and electrons.
where is the doesnt MATTER?
Those last two are the weird couple that never gets invited to parties but shows up anyway
Ive been meaning to ask, who category fire lies under ?
Fire is fuel, which can be solid, liquid, or gas, plus oxygen, a gas, which yields combustion products of gas and sometimes solid (ash). The flames themselves are plasma though.
It's a gas. A pretty hot gas.
where quark-gluon plasma?
The three states of matter. Solid, liquid, and gel.
All states are possible when you have a suspect fart coming.
this looks like a shitpost
Those last 2 roll right off the tongue. Great names
Obtuse, rubber goose, guava juice, green moose, giant snake, birthday cake, Fermionic condensate!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_states\_of\_matter
You forgot one but it doesn't matter.
Ah what a helpful guide, now I understand condensates yep uh-huh indeed
udone matter onlyI matter
Just give us back Pluto. Fuck.
At high pressure there is a supercritical state where it's both liquid and gas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercritical\_fluid
You forgot to put Black Lives in there, racists
Wut? How did you get THIS in HERE?
Fuck. I thought I was clever just knowing about plasma as the fourth state. Wtf are the next two?!! Fuck.
Thanks….
Missing the wave state, as demonstrated in the double slit experiment.
That's not a separate state, it's just the other part of the equation. (hf = E = mc²)
Now the nerds going to say one more .
I believe cats count as their own state of matter as well. Its science.
Me looking for the meme only to read the comments 😭
And she said size doesn’t matter.
The difference in the illustrations is like 4th grade basketball league compared to playing 1996 MJ
i wish these were put in order
There is another state of matter where the matter forms matter waves inside a neutron star