your definition of material: "the matter from which a thing is made or can be made." i already mentioned invisible matter and material being usually about macro "things/objects." I am not obtuse, you are obfuscating.
my definition:
"Material describes the macro while matter is talking about what the object consists of along with matter that takes no visible form."
"Your definition" (< Key words) separates the concept matter from being a material.
You then argue how matter is the underlying substance on a microscopic level.
in response to this schizo garbage:
"When science uses the word "matter" it means they don't know the material."
=
"when they use the word "matter," it (implies) means that they don't know what 'matter can make a thing'"
makes no logical sense
That's your personal interpretation of what I wrote.
To the core all things ( materials ) are made of the exact same thing. Atoms.
From the microscopic to the macroscoping, matter exists simply because we are comprised of what we call matter, at no point does that become untrue at any scale.
When Science uses the term matter, the are not specifying any of the 118 known substances on the periodic table, otherwise they would specify what material they are referring to in any report.
.
.
.
