Did you even read the article you posted yourself? The first sentence is:
In condensed matter physics and materials science, an amorphous solid (or non-crystalline solid) is a solid
So it’s absolutely a solid. The reason for the name is because the structure being non-crystalline gives it interesting properties and is something that doesn’t usually happen. For most substances there is at least some sort of repeating or self-organising structure.
With another state of matter, for example gas or liquid, the structure can’t be seen as it’s constantly changing. Structures might form and then go away. Only when transitioning into a solid the structure becomes fixed. For most materials this is some kind of pattern or repeating structure, with amorphous materials it’s essentially random without any structure. So by definition these are solids, otherwise the structure wouldn’t be there at all.
You didn’t even post the entire sentence that goes on to describe why it’s different than a solid. You are like the media cherry picking a sound bite to try to make somebody look bad. Wow… I genuinely don’t understand the desire to be this pedantic.
All I originally said was not a true solid. If you’re seriously going to take me to task on that ELI5 explanation then you need to reevaluate your priorities.
No, it’s just assholes being assholes that are making it like Reddit…
I didn’t post nonsense. If you honestly think that you would explain to a child that glass is a solid and just leave it at that then you’re touched. Leave me alone for real.
Better than telling them incorrectly that it is a liquid.
Chemistry is a series of models approximating how the universe truly behaves. In the model of states of matter, glass is a solid, not a liquid or gas.
As the child learns more, they will learn that this original model was incomplete (but not wrong), and the universe has many more wonders. They’ll learn about non-neutonian fluids like “ooblek” that flow like liquids, but act like solids when force is applied, and amorphous solids with glass transitions instead of phase changes, about how water is one of the rare chemicals where the solid is less dense than its liquid form, and how cool that is, about crystalline structures and the discovery of the structure of DNA, about how plasma is a 4th stage of matter, beyond solid, liquid, and gas, about the role pressure and temperature plays in state transitions, and how materials may have many different types of solids possible at different temperatures and pressures, like carbon, about how neutron stars exist and are their own type of matter, about how black holes are weird, matter and energy are fundamentally interchangeable, etc etc etc.
Sure, that’s why it has a different name. I’m moving on now.
Did you even read the article you posted yourself? The first sentence is:
So it’s absolutely a solid. The reason for the name is because the structure being non-crystalline gives it interesting properties and is something that doesn’t usually happen. For most substances there is at least some sort of repeating or self-organising structure.
With another state of matter, for example gas or liquid, the structure can’t be seen as it’s constantly changing. Structures might form and then go away. Only when transitioning into a solid the structure becomes fixed. For most materials this is some kind of pattern or repeating structure, with amorphous materials it’s essentially random without any structure. So by definition these are solids, otherwise the structure wouldn’t be there at all.
You didn’t even post the entire sentence that goes on to describe why it’s different than a solid. You are like the media cherry picking a sound bite to try to make somebody look bad. Wow… I genuinely don’t understand the desire to be this pedantic.
All I originally said was not a true solid. If you’re seriously going to take me to task on that ELI5 explanation then you need to reevaluate your priorities.
Alright, tell me in your words why it isn’t a true solid?
Because like the other dude said, it’s like saying an HD TV isn’t a true TV because it’s HD. It makes no sense at all.
“Tell me something I’m already going to dismiss.”
No. Now go away.
Alright, just don’t go saying shit like “Boohoo this place is just like Reddit” when you post nonsense and get down voted for it.
No, it’s just assholes being assholes that are making it like Reddit…
I didn’t post nonsense. If you honestly think that you would explain to a child that glass is a solid and just leave it at that then you’re touched. Leave me alone for real.
Better than telling them incorrectly that it is a liquid.
Chemistry is a series of models approximating how the universe truly behaves. In the model of states of matter, glass is a solid, not a liquid or gas.
As the child learns more, they will learn that this original model was incomplete (but not wrong), and the universe has many more wonders. They’ll learn about non-neutonian fluids like “ooblek” that flow like liquids, but act like solids when force is applied, and amorphous solids with glass transitions instead of phase changes, about how water is one of the rare chemicals where the solid is less dense than its liquid form, and how cool that is, about crystalline structures and the discovery of the structure of DNA, about how plasma is a 4th stage of matter, beyond solid, liquid, and gas, about the role pressure and temperature plays in state transitions, and how materials may have many different types of solids possible at different temperatures and pressures, like carbon, about how neutron stars exist and are their own type of matter, about how black holes are weird, matter and energy are fundamentally interchangeable, etc etc etc.
When did I say it was a liquid?