What is the experimentally measurable difference between rest mass and the 'relativistic mass' of the photon ??!!
in [Relativity]
|
From: Y.Porat on 19 Apr 2010 10:21 hat is the experimentally - measurable difference between rest mass and the 'relativistic mass' of the photon ??!! (at least for me-- the answer is obvious .....) Another copyright question TIA Yehiel Porat 18-04-2010 ---------------------------------------------------------------
From: PD on 20 Apr 2010 10:03 On Apr 20, 12:05 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 19, 8:28 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 19, 9:21 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > hat is the experimentally - measurable difference > > > between rest mass and the 'relativistic mass' of the photon ??!! > > > (at least for me-- the answer is obvious .....) > > > > Another copyright question > > > > TIA > > > Yehiel Porat > > > 18-04-2010 > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Photons don't have a rest mass, and they don't have a relativistic > > mass. And relativistic mass is an antiquated notion that has been > > largely abandoned because it confuses amateurs and some structural > > engineers. > > -------------------------- > no mass > no relativistic mass so ??? > > what is that m in the E=mc^2??!! I already told you this, Porat. In the original context, m was rest mass and E was rest energy. With regard to total energy, the expression is E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2, where again m is rest mass. There is no relativistic mass in there. > > if it is zero > then > > E photon = zero C^2 > and we are very lucky !!! No, because E in E=mc^2 is *rest energy*, not the total photon energy. The photon does not have rest energy, but it does have total energy. Again, the total energy of the photon is E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2, where in this case the rest mass m=0. > > WE GOT RID ONCE AND FOR ALL > FROM ALL ENERGY IN OUR UNIVERSE !!! > ("-) > TIA > Y.Porat > --------------------------------
From: Y.Porat on 20 Apr 2010 10:43 On Apr 20, 4:03 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 20, 12:05 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 19, 8:28 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Apr 19, 9:21 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > hat is the experimentally - measurable difference > > > > between rest mass and the 'relativistic mass' of the photon ??!! > > > > (at least for me-- the answer is obvious .....) > > > > > Another copyright question > > > > > TIA > > > > Yehiel Porat > > > > 18-04-2010 > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Photons don't have a rest mass, and they don't have a relativistic > > > mass. And relativistic mass is an antiquated notion that has been > > > largely abandoned because it confuses amateurs and some structural > > > engineers. > > > -------------------------- > > no mass > > no relativistic mass so ??? > > > what is that m in the E=mc^2??!! > > I already told you this, Porat. In the original context, m was rest > mass and E was rest energy. ----------------------------------------- so we are talking about a formula of Energy right ?? so waht are you talking about rest energy is there a differnce between rest energy and other energy ''' lets take an example: take the fusion process 2 protons and 2 neutrons are turned into Alpha particle th e differnce in mass before and after process is about say ( from memory) about 27 Mev loss of the proton - neutrons -- GAIN OF ENERGY of gamma radiation !! it turned to energy !! that can be formualated as E=mc^2 while m is exactly 27 mev/c^2 !!! now waht is the experimental diference in Quantity / anount /properties/ any diference that you can put your finger on it and say : the m in the protons neutrons is different from the m in the 27 Mev of E in : experimental proven **difference*'-- found No 1 " " '' " No 2 etc etc etc TIA Y.Porat --------------------------------
From: PD on 20 Apr 2010 10:52 On Apr 20, 9:43 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 20, 4:03 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Apr 20, 12:05 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Apr 19, 8:28 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 19, 9:21 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > hat is the experimentally - measurable difference > > > > > between rest mass and the 'relativistic mass' of the photon ??!! > > > > > (at least for me-- the answer is obvious .....) > > > > > > Another copyright question > > > > > > TIA > > > > > Yehiel Porat > > > > > 18-04-2010 > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > Photons don't have a rest mass, and they don't have a relativistic > > > > mass. And relativistic mass is an antiquated notion that has been > > > > largely abandoned because it confuses amateurs and some structural > > > > engineers. > > > > -------------------------- > > > no mass > > > no relativistic mass so ??? > > > > what is that m in the E=mc^2??!! > > > I already told you this, Porat. In the original context, m was rest > > mass and E was rest energy. > > ----------------------------------------- > so we are talking about a formula of > Energy right ?? > > so waht are you talking about rest energy > is there a differnce between rest energy and > other energy Yes, of course. Energy comes in many different flavors: potential energy, configuration energy, rest energy, ordered kinetic energy, stochastic kinetic energy, and so on. The transactions of one type of energy to another are precisely what conservation of energy is all about, Porat. That is high school physics, something a bridge engineer should know like the back of his hand. > ''' > > lets take an example: > > take the fusion process > > 2 protons and 2 neutrons are turned into > Alpha particle > th e differnce in mass before and after process > is about say ( from memory) about 27 Mev > loss of the proton - neutrons -- > GAIN OF ENERGY of gamma radiation !! > it turned to energy !! > > that can be formualated as > E=mc^2 > while m is exactly 27 mev/c^2 !!! > now > waht is the experimental diference in > Quantity / anount /properties/ any diference that you can put your > finger on it > and say : > > the m in the protons neutrons > is different from the m in the 27 Mev of E > in : > > experimental proven **difference*'-- found No 1 > " " '' " No 2 > etc etc etc Porat, Porat, Porat, you should again know this like the back of your hand. What is the rest *mass* of the C-12 nucleus? What is the rest *mass* of 6 protons and 6 neutrons? Subtract the former from the latter. What's the answer? (You don't have to rely on memory. You can do it online. To make it easier to find it online, we'll do it in amu. The mass of the C-12 nucleus is exactly 12 amu. The mass of the proton is 1.00728 amu. The mass of the neutron is 1.00866 amu.) > > TIA > Y.Porat > --------------------------------
From: Y.Porat on 20 Apr 2010 11:42
On Apr 20, 4:52 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 20, 9:43 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 20, 4:03 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Apr 20, 12:05 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 19, 8:28 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Apr 19, 9:21 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > hat is the experimentally - measurable difference > > > > > > between rest mass and the 'relativistic mass' of the photon ??!! > > > > > > (at least for me-- the answer is obvious .....) > > > > > > > Another copyright question > > > > > > > TIA > > > > > > Yehiel Porat > > > > > > 18-04-2010 > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > Photons don't have a rest mass, and they don't have a relativistic > > > > > mass. And relativistic mass is an antiquated notion that has been > > > > > largely abandoned because it confuses amateurs and some structural > > > > > engineers. > > > > > -------------------------- > > > > no mass > > > > no relativistic mass so ??? > > > > > what is that m in the E=mc^2??!! > > > > I already told you this, Porat. In the original context, m was rest > > > mass and E was rest energy. > > > ----------------------------------------- > > so we are talking about a formula of > > Energy right ?? > > > so waht are you talking about rest energy > > is there a differnce between rest energy and > > other energy > > Yes, of course. Energy comes in many different flavors: potential > energy, configuration energy, rest energy, ordered kinetic energy, > stochastic kinetic energy, and so on. ------------------------------------------- PD PD PD (:-) i dont what to be insultive or blunt so soon... (:-) now lets please concentrate on the case of mass is turned 100 % to enrgy so please dont pul my leg about potential energy or 'configuration' energy !! i did it intentionally the simplest case in order of preventing OBFUSCATION !! lets concentrate on the simpest case 100 % of the proton neutron mass turned to gamma radication while E=mc^2 Define S IT SIMPLY AND CLEARLY AND EXACTLY !!! 27 Mev /c^2 mass was lost by particles and 27 Mev /c^2 was gained by gamma radiation so just have a the Energy formula of that Em radiation it is exacly E=m c^2 =27Mev and the mas there is exactly 27 Mev /c^2!! i hope you are not Artful to say that here is no * m**at all in THAT CASE of the specific Em radiation th e most you can do is to 'CALL IT'' RELATIVISTIC MASS !! (or whatever ok ?? so now comes my above question please give me (us) a** list of experimentally *and measured * proven differences** between the 'rest mass *loss *of the protons neutrons -- and your 'relativistic mass' of the Em radiation in that specific fusion case TIA Y.Porat -------------------------------- |