
#1
Mar1412, 09:20 AM

P: 253

well i am trying to understand the basic of mass and i got myself into a deadlock of questions
firstly the definition of mass as i know is :quantitative measure of an object's resistance to the change of its speed. assumption:particle have charge but no mass and they just fall into the significant field of each other,there is nothing they interact with except each other and a force F. now consider a situation where a particle with charge say q comes into significant field influence of another particle with charge +Q,it then follow a particular path P,suppose a force F is used to the bring a change in path of q,the force F does so in two ways:at first it tries to change the path of q by change it's state of motion(either by accelerating or deceleration him) ,thus the resistance offered to F relative to him appeared because of the electromagnetic interaction between the charges. In the second case the force F tries to change the trajectory of q but by not changing it's state of motion(maintaining it's velocity),in this case also the resistance offered was due to the electromagnetic interaction. so according to the definition of mass the resistance offered in first scenario should add to mass but not second,though it can be clearly seen that the resistance offered is because of the electromagnetic interaction under action. SO WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE PICTURE DEPICTED? 



#2
Mar1412, 05:06 PM

PF Gold
P: 11,012





#3
Mar1412, 06:08 PM

Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 11,352

The word "resistance" is not the best one to use because that implies dissipating / losing energy  as with electrical resistance. A better word would be "reaction against", which also ties in with Newton's Third Law  'Action and reaction are equal and opposite'.
Also, you may find it easier to talk of purely mechanical forces (pulling with a force meter or string) so that we don't get bogged down with electric forces, which is just adding more complication because the Coulomb force depends upon separation. I can't actually see the distinction between your two scenarios. If you are trying to change a particle's "state of motion" then you need to apply a force, by some means or another. Acceleration is a rate of change of Velocity, which is a vector quantity, in which direction and magnitude are both important. f=ma does not distinguish between change of speed or change of direction. The existence of mass will be equally apparent if either quantities is changed. 



#4
Mar1512, 07:40 AM

P: 253

mass and resistanceor what i mean to speak of is inertial mass of particles observed knowing the fact that before the moment of observation they were mass less 



#5
Mar1512, 07:41 AM

P: 253





#6
Mar1512, 07:43 AM

Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 11,352





#7
Mar1512, 07:45 AM

Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 11,352





#8
Mar1512, 07:58 AM

P: 253





#9
Mar1512, 08:09 AM

Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 2,197





#10
Mar1512, 08:13 AM

P: 253

when they just start to interact,describe the situation 



#11
Mar1512, 08:17 AM

P: 427

You cannot deal with massless particles in the framework of Newtonian Mech. If there is ANY net force, and mass is zero, there would need to be infinite acceleration. That is silly when dealing with classical mechanics, but you can probably convince yourself the a massless particle, when considered in the framework of relativity, would move at the speed of light.
There is no "resistance" from the EM interaction, just another force. The "resistance" to acceleration from mass is intrinsic and is called inertia. The EM interaction is an external force that will accelerate the particle, not keep it moving at constant speed. Note that you don't have mass because you are on earth in a gravitational field. You have mass no matter where in the universe you are. Your inertia is the same if you were speeding along through empty space, but when on earth, there is also a force (which oddly is also proportional to your mass) that keeps you on the surface of earth. There is no answer to your question, but I hope this clears up why there is no answer. 



#12
Mar1512, 08:29 AM

P: 253





#13
Mar1512, 08:56 AM

P: 427





#14
Mar1512, 06:11 PM

PF Gold
P: 11,012





#15
Mar1612, 10:39 AM

P: 253





#16
Mar1612, 10:40 AM

P: 253





#17
Mar1612, 10:49 AM

Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 2,197

That said, there are as far as we know no charged, massless, particles. The only thing I can think of that comes close is e.g. quasiparticles in graphene (which are described by the Dirac equation), but they are of course not "real" particles. 


Register to reply 
Related Discussions  
Force, mass versus resistance to move a weight  General Physics  23  
Question to find speed at terminal velocity with mass and the air resistance  General Physics  0  
calculating effects of air resistance on a falling mass  Introductory Physics Homework  2  
2 Masses on a spring and a rocket with changing mass and air resistance  Advanced Physics Homework  1  
Rocket with Variable Mass and Air Resistance.  Introductory Physics Homework  2 