Recognitions:
Homework Help

## A question about particle mass

 Quote by Kazz I really wish I could post stuff here without being bashed for mistakes and explained POLITELY why it's wrong and not with sarcasm and rudeness.
I was not being sarcastic. The most effective way to point out a flaw in an argument is often to demonstrate its most absurd consequences. Reductio, as they say, ad absurdum. Nothing else was working.

 The problem with rearranging it that way is that its slightly miss-using the equation. The m in E=mc2 is "rest mass", not relativistic mass.

Recognitions:
 Quote by FeynmanIsCool The m in E=mc2 is "rest mass", not relativistic mass.
Other way around. For rest mass, the equation is E²=p²c²+(mc²)². Though, convention is to reserve the symbol 'm' for rest mass. In which case, the first equation should be written as E=γmc².

 The number is $\approx7.37\times10^{-51}kg$. I doubt that there is an elementary particle with that mass for a number of reasons. First, there is no reason to expect that there would be. That doesn't mean that there isn't, but the chance of there being one is about the same as any other number. Second, and more importantly, this is about 20 orders of magnitude less than the any other known elementary particles. Perhaps there are smaller particles that we don't know about, but that would be 100% speculation. P.S. Don't take people's comments personally. The internet can make things sound mean when there was no intention of that. If you are interested in physics you should A) learn to be told you're wrong (this will happen more often than anything else) B) try to figure it out on your own. If you plug the numbers in and check on Wikipedia (more less all that I did) you'll see that numbers don't work out to be anything meaningful. If they did... you could ask why and you would get the answer "by chance"

 Quote by K^2 Other way around. For rest mass, the equation is E²=p²c²+(mc²)². Though, convention is to reserve the symbol 'm' for rest mass. In which case, the first equation should be written as E=γmc².
Your right, I should clarify next time.

 I still got the same mass after I did c times plancks length squared over gravitational constant (from GM/d^2)
 Recognitions: Science Advisor No you didn't. Plank's length is meters. Squared is m². c is m/s, so you have m³/s. Gravitational constant is N(m/kg)². So your final result is m³kg²/(m²N*s) = m*kg²/(N*s) = m*kg²/(kg*m/s) = kg*s. Your answer isn't even in kilograms, so whatever you got, it isn't mass.