From: Y.Porat on
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
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
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
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
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
--------------------------------