Talk:Matter

"volume" different from "space taken up" to the exclusion of other matter?

E.g. a gas "takes up" far less space than its volume because most of the volume is empty (we could put other atoms there). Only the fermions themselves take up space exclusively due to pauli? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavRosen (talk • contribs) 23:34, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

@DavRosen: Are you talking about a specific part of the article? RockMagnetist(talk) 00:16, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

What not protect?

Jovito11 (talk) 23:46, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Matter

As we look at our sroundings we see a large variety of of things diffrent shapes, sizes,and textures. Everything in this universe is made up of material which scientist have named matter.😶😶 Shagun sindhia (talk) 14:11, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Nyc Shagun sindhia (talk) 14:12, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Edit request

I have checked the articles antimatter and quantum chemistry, and I haven't managed to spot any connection between the two subjects in either article. Apparently, antimatter isn't a major topic covered in quantum chemistry. Given this, I think the mention of "quantum chemistry" in the start of the Antimatter section of this article should be removed. --186.185.87.21 (talk) 03:54, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm still waiting for an answer, guys. --186.185.60.147 (talk) 17:49, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

 Done: couldn't find any significant literature link either. I have removed the unneeded "in ..." part altogether: [1]. - DVdm (talk) 18:29, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Matter vs Substance

In this article, the definition of matter is the following:

In classical physics and general chemistry, matter is any substance that has mass and takes up space by having volume.

Looking up for Substance, we see:

Substance may refer to:

• Substance (Jainism), a term in Jain Ontology to denote the base or owner of attributes
• Chemical substance, a material with a definite chemical composition
• Importance or depth
• Matter, anything that has mass and takes up space
• Substance theory, an ontological theory positing that a substance is distinct from its properties

If the right neaning is Matter, then it is a circular definition (vicious circle). If the right meaning is Chemical substance, the wikilink should point to that article.Ufim (talk) 14:53, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

True enough. Defining fundamental concepts in physics using natural language is often problematic. I would suggest a rephrase:

In physics and chemistry, matter is anything that has mass.

"Classical" physics and "general" chemistry is superfluous; debatably, fundamental massive particles have zero volume; and I agree that "substance" is, at best, unclear.

"anything" is also circular since a "thing" may be matter.

Thoughts? Cosmogoblin (talk) 18:28, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

I would just remove the naming of any science in that part. Matter is something that, well, matters for many other fields, not just physics or chemistry. And in all sciences, it has the same definition, so I don't feel like it's necessary to imply that the definition provided in the article is only true for one or two fields. --2601:701:300:4BC0:B061:6B20:C46:6CCD (talk) 18:55, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Request to hyperlink Antimatter

First mention of Antimatter should be a link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter I would link myself but for protected status. Figured if I was going to search just to go back into the wiki I can do this as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.254.0.162 (talk • contribs) 11:27, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Please put new talk page messages at the bottom of talk pages and sign your messages with four tildes (~~~~) — See Help:Using talk pages. Thanks.

 Done. See [2]. - DVdm (talk) 12:26, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Edit request

First paragraph states that matter "does not include massless particles such as photons, or other energy phenomena or waves such as light or sound." Why isn't electricity in this list? Please add it. Something like "...or other energy phenomena such as electricity, or waves such as ..." Thanks