Google Search: “Does matter without mass exist?”Google Answer: “Yes, retard. Photons are a thing.”Google Search: “Is light a form of matter?”Google Answer: “No, retard. Light has no mass!”
Matter =/= mass
>>16869405Unless Google says it is
>>16869400Next you're going to ask why photons are attracted to gravity.
Scientists cannot agree on words. Now it is spreading to AI. More news at eleven.
>>16869474Photons just follow the bends the local massies create. They don't be the ones doing the bending.Not that they couldn't. They just don't want to. Too busy moving that electromagnetic information around town, you know?
>>16869479"Google is Science!" declares pseud on underwater basket weaving forum.nUwZ @ !!1
>>16869479>Now it is spreading to AI.Who trained the trainers?
>>16869405>>photons are matter>>light is not matter>ACK-CHALLY, matter =/= massI can always recognize an Americoon just by the way you are all dumber than literal bots.
technically photon has math but doesn't act like it due to symmetry
>>16869921mass*
>>16869921A photon is nothing if not for its maths.You were correct the first time. Well, more correct, at least.
Matter has a philosophical definition. But what is the physical definition in, for example, Quantum Field Theory? I don't think it makes sense to define matter outside of some framework. Isn't it the case that in Newtonian physics concepts linked to matter like mass are actually left undefined, just like space and time? What matters is what you can do with them, as you can do euclidean geometry with undefined concepts of point, line, plane.
>>16870232Maybe you already thought of it, but you're actually hinting at something even deeper with where you are going in your post. Most of the concepts that people take for granted as having ontological reality are actually just epistemological devices either invented or discovered in order to solve a problem that required some new form of knowledge that didn't exist up until that point. Matter, mass, and a lot of things people think they know about are actually like this. Even the concept of "objectivity" and an "objective" world beyond our physical senses which our brains can only struggle to represent as this hallucenation we call "consciousness", it sounds almost superstitous and neo-platonic if you think about it, and it kinda is, but people treat these concepts as super grounded and foundational. The belief that there really is an external objective world is pretty well-founded in everything everywhere these days, it's called "empiricism", and it ground more than just scientific research through falsification, it's actually just kind of the default worldview for most modern societies. But it wasn't always this way, you just have to go back pretty far to when people actually listened to schizos and they were just called mathematicians.
>>16870232>What mattersMatter matters.
