As we currently know, matter in nature is divided into real objects and fields. The existence of matter will occupy a certain space. When there is no physical object in the space, it is called empty.
If we look at the experience in the macro world, most of the space inside atom is empty. From a microscopic perspective, since the way matter exists is different from the macroscopic phenomena we see, it cannot be considered that most of the space is empty.
For ordinary matter composed of physical particles in the universe, if there is absolutely solid matter, it means that there are indivisible elementary particles.
Since humans have limited understanding of nature, they can only answer based on the current mainstream scientific views of human beings. According to current experiments and the standard model of particle physics, the elementary particles under this model can be temporarily treated as solid matter, and there is currently no definite evidence that these elementary particles still have finer structures. So there is no clear answer to this question yet.
will introduce it in detail below.
Human understanding of atoms hike
People have long realized that matter is composed of particles. For a long time, atoms have been believed to be indivisible elementary particles. It was not until the late 19th century that physicists discovered the internal structure of the subatomic particle and the atoms, proving that atoms can be re-divided.
1897, Thomson discovered electrons while studying cathode rays and proved that atoms could be re-divided. Electrons are the first subatomic particle discovered by humans. By the beginning of the 20th century, Rutherford discovered proton again, realized that atoms had nuclear structures, and believed that neutron also existed in atomic nucleus . In 1932, Rutherford's student Chadwick verified the existence of neutrons through experiments.
According to the public's understanding, the structure of atoms is like the structure of the solar system. The earth revolves around the sun and electrons are also revolving around the atomic nucleus. This model can be convenient for people to understand, but is not completely correct. In fact, according to quantum mechanics theory, the electronic cloud model is the most appropriate model. Only then can humans fully understand atoms and their structures.
The space inside the atom is different from the space in the macro world
From a macro perspective, the real thing always occupies a certain amount of space, and the space range it occupies is measurable. For example, for a desk in the classroom, the volume of the desk is the size of the space it occupies. If the entire classroom has only one table, then the classroom will appear empty.
The diameter of an atom refers to the space occupied by the nucleus and electrons around the nucleus, which is about 10^-10 meters, while the diameter of the nucleus is between 10^-15~10^-14 meters. The nucleus accounts for 99% of the total mass of atoms, but its volume accounts for only one hundred billionth of the atom's volume. The mass of the electrons outside the nuclear are very small, only 1/1836 of the mass of the proton, and the diameter is about 10^-15 meters.
From the above data, we can see that the space inside the atom is really empty. Not only does the atomic nucleus occupy very small space, but the space occupied by electrons also occupy very small. The way electrons move differently from the way planets move in the macroscopic world, so it is inappropriate to say that the inside of atoms is empty.
The movement of macroscopic objects can be accurately predicted. For example, astronomers can accurately predict the movement trajectory of the earth. However, when facing microscopic particles such as atoms, I am helpless because the movement rules of microscopic world are different from those of the macroscopic world. Electrons move around a nucleus, not like planets move around stars. Electrons do not have a constant orbit of motion, but are distributed around the nucleus by probability. The higher the energy level of the electron, the higher the probability of appearing in space areas far away from the nucleus, and vice versa.
Because the movement position of electrons outside the nucleus is uncertain, electrons can appear randomly at any position, but the probability of occurrence in some areas is high and the probability of occurrence in some areas is low. The low probability of occurrence does not mean that it is impossible. It can be seen that the emptiness inside atoms is different from the emptiness in the macroscopic world.Whether
has absolutely solid matter, it is not clear that
solid matter must not have secondary structures, because it itself is the most basic form of material existence.
With human beings' deep understanding of the essence of things, we found that the real objects in the universe are composed of tiny particles, such as molecules, atoms, electrons, protons, quarks, , photons, etc. It's like building blocks, first forming several blocks of building blocks, and then using these blocks to form a complete work. A desk is made up of countless atoms.
We once thought that atoms were the smallest particles that constitute matter, but with the development of science and technology, we have discovered subatomic particles such as electrons, protons, and neutrons. The use of large-scale colliders has made us realize that nuclear bodies are composed of quarks. Are particles such as quarks and electrons the most basic particles? It is not yet clear.
English is composed of 26 English letters, but humans have discovered as many as 61 basic particles, which makes people suspect that these particles may have a deeper structure.
For this reason, scientists have proposed many theories, and the most promising one at present is string theory. Theoretical physicists believe that these particles are actually composed of several tiny strings, and the different vibrations and movements of the strings will produce different elementary particles. Unfortunately, there is no way to use experiments to verify whether the theory is correct.
Friends who love science, welcome to follow me.
