Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
Peter
I think you need to take a Yin/Yang approach and give balance to the debate.
So if you have a Plasma. What would the opposite be?
You could make the argument that it would be a Bose-Einstein Condensate. That cool superfluid with low energy states.
Now you can change the debate and have 5 states of matter. Nothing like a new variable to consider!
From here you need a fulcrum to balance the debate.
Thus you can point out that the central state of matter in your new list is a liquid.
So get those feuding Chemists to buy you a drink (or two) while you ponder either side of your newly balanced Matter of State.
: )
Cheers Fletch
Quoting Peter Schoch <pschoch@nac.net>:
I find myself in the middle of a heated debate by our Chemists. Several of them gives the states of matter as: solid liquid, gas, plasma. The opposing group vehemently objects to the inclusion of plasma as a state of matter, as they claim it is just a special case of gases.
Why they think that I, as a physicist, would be a great arbiter of this is a mystery to me. After a bit of research I am leaning toward the traditional "solid, liquid, gas" argument; however, before sticking my head in the lion's mouth I thought I would solicit opinions here.
Thanks,
Peter
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l