Alright Autistic question time. If you cut an object with something

i think every single bit of the green strip is pushed to the sides

>>9164550
Like every single molecule?

How do you know?

File: Untitled.png (12KB, 512x504px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 512x504px

>>9164554
ok i was thinking in this again
imagine a hypothetical situation with three particles (the situation on the pic)

notice that the vector is not necesseraly vertical or horizontal, to awser ur question, both things happen at once depending on many factors

>>9164579
by "vector" i mean the purple ones

>>9164548
no, you are splitting the atoms. a nuclear fission reactor works this way

some gets pushed by the edge but eventually gets "smeared" to the sides.

though it would probably depend on the cut material, the cutting material, and the force behind the cut

>>9164603
no you fucking biologist. the atoms in the green line are annihilated completely into radiation. thus, knives cause cancer

>>9164548
Cut out a slice of cake with a knife. Report back with results

>>9164603
I'm talking about a regular knife blade with any standard material from paper to metal. I wanted to know if anything would simply be compressed underneath the edge of the blade instead of being pushed to the side, but it seems the answer is "no".

>>9164617
I don't have the optics to verify any microscopic behaviors. Simply not seeing particles with human eyes would not be enough evidence to convince me that such a thing can't occur.

>>9164621
I... wasn't serious, my autistic friend.

Another example of all these people giving answers when in fact there is no general answer, as it depends on many different variables.

Go take a bunch of playdoh in different colors and make a rainbow block then cut it at various places with knives of various sharpness (bonus points for different cutting methods) and look at the differences in how the material cuts, then consider that this is keeping the absolute largest variable constant - the properties of the material being cut - so now imagine how many different answers there are to the question and realize that there is no useful answer to the general question, as any answer which must be general enough to cover all circumstances must necessarily be vague enough to have no useful information.

>>9164627
I know that, I think you're the one who doesn't realize that. Splitting atoms obviously isn't possible with a regular knife but I replied because I didn't specify the size of a blade. If you could somehow form a blade small enough to split an atom (neverminding the actual physical limitations required to do so) what you suggest would indeed be possible.

So while you were joking, it was still applicable to my question at hand. Your jumping to calling me an autist while it may be demeaning and perhaps fitting only reveals the lack of depth to which you thought this through.

>>9164650
>Alright Autistic question time.
>autism.png

>dont call me autistic

>>9164624
You don't need to verify any microscopic behaviors. Cake will get stuck to the knife.

>>9164630
There's an answer to question and it's circumstantial. A general question gets a general answer, and that's fine.
In this instance there are cases when the described theory will occur and cases where it will not, and that's a fine answer.
What you said was really sounds like just garbage to make yourself feel better about "knowing" something or having a perspective others don't, as I got plenty of useful answers, yours included.


>>9164630
I didn't say to not call me autistic, I even said it may be fitting. Learn to read, you joke.

>>9164548
When the scale gets small enough the force of the cut pretty much tears the material apart. How this actually looks depends on the atomic structure of the material being cut. Look up SEM images of things that have been cut and examine the textures on the cut surface.

>>9164548
depends on the blade and the material being cut.