The question you asked is too general.
Measuring and finding the volume of mass of
"something" can or cannot be important to Science,
depending on what you are doing or why you are
trying to measure mass or volume.
There are tons of examples where mass or
volume could be irrelevant. For example, the mass
of a whale might not be important at all for
computer scientists or fundamental physics study.
this is not what you are asking, I will list
some examples of mass or volume that could play
important roles in Science. The bottom line is
that the mass or volume represent some and
limited basic properties of the subjects.
1) The first example is the mass or the volume
of some chemicals. Knowing the mass or volume
you can determine the density of the
material. This is important because we can
make some direct comparisons of the density of two
different compounds. One reference that is of
great importance is the density of water.
For example, since our human body has a similar
density as water, it won't take much effort for
us to float on it. Imagine if the density of water
were only half or even less of what it is, then it
would be much difficult for us to swim in it.
Furthermore, there are some other consequences of
the density of water, such as the increased
difficulty for marine animals to live in oceans,
or the reduced shipping ability for vessels.
Basically, by knowing the mass or volume,
you are able to calculate density. For
example, lighter materials are important in space
exploration or aviation; while heavier materials
are more stable against outer perturbations.
2) Another quite important application of mass as
a physical property is in Astronomy. To simply put
it, the mass alone pretty much determines the fate
of a celestial object. In the past we thought we
were located at the center of the universe, but
now we know that the earth is orbiting around our
sun, since the total mass of earth is only about
0.0003% of the mass of the sun. This is also true
for other planets in our solar system like
Jupiter, which is the heaviest of these planets
and has only 0.1% of mass compared to the sun. The
lighter objects will orbit around the heavier
As a matter of fact, the mass of the sun is
a basic unit. The
stellar mass should be comparable to the mass
of sun. Very low mass stars (still comparing to
Sun) will probably become white dwarfs,
while massive stars (~10 times the mass of Sun)
will likely become black holes.
The mass and radius of the star will also
determine the surface gravity, which is also
true for planets like our earth.
On the other hand, the mass will also likely
determine the lifetime of a star since the
mass is consumed at a certain rate in a particular
phase (there could be several phases). Our sun is
estimated to live for 5 billion years. If the mass
of Sun were much less than the current value, it
won't even become a star, or at least it would
have a shorter lifetime.
Click Here to return to the search form.