When we study philosophy, no matter what the question there is always a response. Whether or not the responses actually answer the questions is often debatable. So here in this thread I thought it would be nice for people to try and talk about the questions that don’t seem really answerable, and maybe to try and give contexts in which some answers to some questions might suffice. We should try and keep this thread free-form, and anyone should ask or answer anything they’d like. We’ll let popular opinion decide when a question is exhaustively addressed, and by that we can get some idea of the unknowable. I’ll start…
Good question. Some might say that a good way of describing matter would be to postulate constants (a nucleus) in order to measure changes. These might be the people who agree that the only thing constant is change. I heard some lecture on Daltonian atomism ,(if that’s how you spell it) the other day and it seemed to be along those lines. I dunno though. To me it wasn’t a sufficient explanation of matter.
Theres many constants in physics. They all have to do with transforming a physical system in some way that leaves it alone(doesn’t change the physics). For instance moving it in time relates to energy, moving it along a straingh line relates to momentum, turning it around relates to angular momentum and changing its phase relates to its charge.
All these things are just change so I guess I would agree matter is just change. change in time, change in position, change in orientation, change in phase.
“The only constant is change” I oftern think the greatest truths sound like paradoxes.