Matter, Energy, & Force. Which Came First?

[AlwaysLearning]

& at what point in time?

"Matter, Force, & Energy are all forms of natural phenomenon, therefore they were never invented."

^That doesn't answer the question. Regardless, at some point in time, man came up with the concept, & defined them.

"Scientifically speaking, Energy came first. (Think of the Big Bang)"

^That doesn't answer the question either.

Here,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO0r930Sn_8

Listen closely to what Feynman's trying to get across. At some point in time, one needs to set some framework or foundation. Matter, force, & energy are the foundation. Can someone explain when these concepts were developed?



A gentleman once told me I shouldn't worry about the history. What's important is what is known now.

I shook my head. The person that sits next to me in Calc (high school) has an A. As we were waiting in line one day, I dropped my pencil & asked him if the pencil accelerated or not. He said, of course. So I asked him how one would calculate that.

He couldn't give me an answer...

 

[tpetar]

Re: Matter, Energy, & Force. Which Came First?

A gentleman once told me I shouldn't worry about the history. What's important is what is known now.

Better to know what will happen in future, history give you direction, and what you know now give you speed, and for now dont worry "now" dont exist. When you mean in head to say "N" from "Now" its history.

We start with fire and candle, meanwhile we play with electrons, computers, space explorations,... and we will again back to only fire and candle. :smile: Maybe we are to small and young to give such clever and hard answers but its worth to try. Maybe on Mars we will find some country flag with some gold record from some earlier civilization cycles from our planet.

 

[BradtheRad]

By pondering big mysteries we may eventually solve one or two smaller mysteries.

Feynman had to ponder so that he could discover the quark. That was after he had learned practically everything everyone knew at the time, concerning atomic and subatomic physics.

I'm thinking about a saying photographers tell themselves: To get a few good photographs, take lots of photographs.

Songwriters: To get a few good songs, write lots of songs.

So...

To solve one or two mysteries, ponder many mysteries.

 

[AlwaysLearning]

Thanks for the responses.


430BC: Democritus claims the atom to be the simplest unit of matter.

In 430BC, is that what they called the "stuff" of everyday life or was this term coined later?


384BC-322BC: Aristotle proclaims 2 theories of motion.

1.) Theory of heavenly motion
2.) Theory of earthly motion


1642-1727: Newton unified earthly motion (Galileo) & heavenly motion (kepler) in a simple set of laws.



___________________________________________


Which came first? The concept or the definition? Easy, right? The concept of course. So in 430BC, that is when the term "matter" was coined?

How about Force? Did Aristotle come up with this word & define it with his two theories?

Go back another 200 years to Thales of Miletus when what we know today as "static electricity" was discovered. If the word "Force" wasn't invented until 200 laters later, then what did Thales call it?

I don't want to know if he knew or assumed something was going on that he couldn't see. I want to know whether or not he acknowledged it as a "force." The word, not the concept.

You can even go further & talk about the discovery of lodestone in Magnesia 1400 years prior. If the word "Force" wasn't invented, then how did they describe what was happening?



I want to know when & where the term "force" was invented & tossed into the vocabulary of w/e the people were speaking. I want to know when this term was used interchangeably & acknowledged by everyone, regardless of the variables. For example, a comet shooting across the night sky or me dropping a ball to the ground.

If I can't get a "January 5th, 2036 BC at 6:13 PM in Northern Asia off the Mountain of *** knows," then the least I can get is a general idea or a practical application that would give explanation.

There has to be one. I refuse not to think so. If there wasn't, the term "force" wouldn't exist niether would the definition. If I can't get an answer, I'm going to be perpetually questioning in every direction & will end up driving my physics teacher bat f*cking insane next year.

 

[BradtheRad]

In our quest to understand, we come up with definitions but that isn't the same as understanding.

We have grown some branches of theory... and a few practical applications (twigs)... and there ought to be a trunk to the tree, but strangely we don't have that part yet.

In practical terms... we can attach a magnet to a refrigerator...

and it will stay there, defying gravity, with no external source of power, indefinitely.

Even though a classical physics textbook would say no mass was moved, nevertheless some kind of work is being done.

Yet we cannot understand how magnetism works. It might as well be magic, because our definitions don't help us much.

Nevertheless progress can be made. If men such as Tesla and Faraday and Volta could grasp a few concepts, and put them to work for us...

Then someday we may understand magnetism and electricity and gravity.

To do that, somebody (perhaps you) will need to take in all the available information about those fields, and find a space for some new concept that will enhance our understanding.

 

[jeeudr]

I think that the crux of the issue is in answering 'why' questions.

The previous post reminded me of the video of Feynman explaining magnets: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO0r930Sn_8

 

[AlwaysLearning]

I think that the crux of the issue is in answering 'why' questions.

The previous post reminded me of the video of Feynman explaining magnets: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO0r930Sn_8

See post #1. I included Feynman's video on magnets. This is EXACTLY what I'm trying to get across.

Feynman is incorrect upon stating "perpetual."

Assuming I'm the one who's asking "why"

It may take 100 questions. It may take 50,000 questions. Regardless, at some point, we are going to find ourselves back in history defining a single concept. This is EXACTLY what I'm digging at. If I can find that concept, & get a time frame & application, then I will be satisfied.

 

[jeeudr]

Coming back to your post (#4 in this thread)

I want to know when & where the term "force" was invented & tossed into the vocabulary of w/e the people were speaking. I want to know when this term was used interchangeably & acknowledged by everyone, regardless of the variables. For example, a comet shooting across the night sky or me dropping a ball to the ground.

If I can't get a "January 5th, 2036 BC at 6:13 PM in Northern Asia off the Mountain of *** knows," then the least I can get is a general idea or a practical application that would give explanation.

What is it that you are exactly looking for ? The first usage of a word ? Why do you want to concern yourself with definitions and names of events ? It is only the understanding/reasoning/intuition behind that matters.

The point would be that there is no short answer to your question of searching for 'real foundations'. Despite the growth of the internet/forums/online-courses/wikipedia, the best way (albeit long) to go about learning these concepts still remains to be a formal training in physics (a bachelors/a masters/ a phd?) at an institution. Both physics and mathematics have undergone tremendous revolutions since the 19th century, rewriting almost everything that was taken for granted since centuries earlier. Our current physical knowledge of the world has been extremely improved in the past years with general/special relativity, quantum mechanics, gauge theories and more recently M/string theories. For the common-man/engineer/non-theoretical-physicist, these theories explain almost all the aspects of our physical world that we might be encounter. It would take years of training for any person to truly realise the limitations of modern theories and understand the true unsolved problems in mathematics and physics.

In the slippery slope of 'why' questions, you begin to venture into metaphysics and philosophy (not that it is a bad thing*), which without the proper background/training could just end up in a lot of wasted time and wild goose chases.

Right know, your question appears to stand by itself and is in fact quite poorly defined. You can continue with your perpetual 'why' questions, but cannot expect to be taken seriously.

You would end up with an answer most probably looking like one of two possibilities:
a. because this is the explanation that we currently have that best fits the observed data as well as makes accurate predictions
b. your question doesn't make any 'physical' sense and deeper 'why' questions are just 'non-physical' issues for philosophers and theologians.

I am not firmly siding with the two answers above, but just stating the results of my pursuits of 'why' questions.


*I still remember one of my teachers remarking that at the deepest levels of science, it becomes indistinguishable from philosophy. (similar to Clarke's famous law on any sufficiently advanced technology being indistinguishable from magic). I personally am not against philosophy. I believe that some major advances to both the sciences and humanities have been a result of this branch of knowledge.

 

[ashugtiwari]

Don't know the exact answer. But u can get the answer if u look for it inside urself.
BTW, everything starts with 0 and will eventually end to 0. so, anything could have come out of 0, may be first energy, which then created matter, then interaction of matter and energy created force.
well, its not scientific answer but i gave answer from within me, instead of looking all theories on google.

hope that helps.

 

[AlwaysLearning]

The first usage of the word?

You see, that's a difficult question. Do you want the first usage of the word itself or the concept? ...because the concept probably came long before the word. Edit: of course it did.

Why do I want to concern myself with definitions & names of events?

Because in order for me to learn anything, I need to learn in an orderly manner. Think of it as teaching space-time to a toddler. The problem is I can't learn from what's already refined. That's just cheating myself. I'm still laughing at my neighbor in Calc class. Lmfao, get's an A in Calc & when asked how to calculate the speed of a falling object, he doesn't even know where to start. If you want to test your knowledge, then take away the variables, & from there you'll see how smart you really are, lmao.

When I ask you "why", what I'm doing is searching for rational reasoning.

Take electricity for example. If I ask you how current travels, you might say "because of electrons."

But, is that really the answer to my question? Absolutely not. Electrons are nothing more than a made up model/system to give explanation.

The only rational reasoning we have is observation ...& from there we begin to model. This is exactly why Feynman is incorrect when he used the word "perpetual." You see, he used it too loosely. Again, it may take 10,000 questions, it may take 50,000 questions. At some point in time, you're going to find yourself back in history at some concept & more than likely that concept was only thought of to give reasoning to some observation.

If you want to understand why anything works at it's simplest level, f*ck everything else & focus on the observation. Because, everything we know -the model, the system, etc., was developed AFTER.

Lmfao, might I add the whole "is light a wave or a particle?" AHA! You see, observation. lol

_________________________________________________________________

I'll keep it simple,

When were the words force, mass, & energy created? Don't think about the concepts. Just state a date & a person. It's simple question that requires a simple answer.

 

[jeeudr]

 

[AlwaysLearning]

Re: Matter, Energy, & Force. Which Came First?

I knew it! Force, Matter, & Energy are three words that are just programmed into the human mind at birth!

Finally!



Facepalm.


Lol, dictionaries should be forced to reference a date or name for each word.

You can't answer the question, can you? You don't know how to differentiate between the concept & the word itself.

Let me go full retard,

Force. That's "F-O-R-C-E"

Who put "F-O-R-C-E" together? C'mon, who put those 5 letters together to get that word? Probably the same guy who defined it, eh?

- - - Updated - - -

Yet we cannot understand how magnetism works. It might as well be magic, because our definitions don't help us much.

This.

The only rational reasoning we really have, is from what we can observe ...& from there, the least we can do is develop systems & models to give explanation.