well it seems that you change in mass would be equal to your change in energy, potential or kinetic, then that divided by the speed of light squared plus your rest mass? Is there a mass that stays invariant no matter what reference frame you observe it from?
So mass is not a set number at all then. If you were traveling next to an object at the same velocity, and you measured its mass, and then some how measured it while you were at rest and the object was still moving, their masses would differ?
Ok this may or may not sound like a very stupid idea. But having read the Black Hole War by Leonard Susskind, he makes a claim that as the Earth gets closer and closer to the center, squeezed by gravity, it loses potential energy. The lost potential energy is then radiated as heat, and therefore...
Actually JesseM, that makes perfect sense to me now. I somewhat thought that may be it, but I understand now that the ever increasing redshift causes it to disappear to plain sight. Its really interesting how black holes work and its odd to think how many contradictions to everyday life occur...
But that doesn't make sense. If someone at a great distance never see's the particle cross at the event horizon, then it never disappears completely does it? so wouldn't the black hole illuminate, or at least be visible from all the particles that has fallen into it?
Hmmm, this is an interesting problem. Take into account a Minkowski diagram (the three spatial dimmensions on the X axis plotted as a funtion of time on the Y axis). If you move back into time, which would be moving down in a verticle line, you yourself stay in the same position it seems at a...
Well, I'm currently reading The Black Hole War by Leonard Susskind, and one thing to me seriously doesn't add up. It says that when someone falls into a black hole, and observer from the outside would not see them fall into the singularity, but they would seem to stretch out and move slower and...
wow that's a good amount of reading. Thank you! what i really hope to get out of this is the ability to write a good proof and understand why stuff works. Its odd because i used to hate proofs in geometry freshman year, but now i really want to learn to write some. I always wonder why stuff...
Well, first of all I'm extremely interested in math. I'm a junior in high school right now and I am taking the highest math i can for my grade, which is pre-calculus honors and I am also teaching myself single variable calculus. I have read some of Road to Reality by Roger Penrose, which teaches...
I've read a lot of the "popular" physics book, i.e. Brief History of Time, Relativity, Elegant Universe, etc. I want something more, perhaps explaining why things work with math and what not. Maybe not so popular, yet intriguing none the less. Does anyone have any ideas?
a one dimensional string was thought of as a zero dimensional point particle because of how small it was, and the more advanced mathematics behind the theory of strings. And energy is not a mathematical construct, its a real thing. You can have pure energy. Energy and mass are the same thing...
thats actually great advice. thank you for that, gmax. And you are exactly right. I love physics and reading about advanced stuff. It teaches me to think logically and creativity and view this world as something more than what i see. Hopefully i can make some money doing that as well, but i...
Does anyone know of a good physics interactive computer program to mess around with, and perhaps even learn something? maybe even a mathematics program as well would be cool. if you have any ideas, i'd appreciate you sharing!