Can motion be turned into matter?

  • Thread starter Thread starter andreasdagen
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matter Motion
AI Thread Summary
Motion cannot be directly turned into matter, as motion is defined as a change in position over time and does not inherently possess mass. However, kinetic energy can be transformed into radiation energy, which may then lead to the creation of matter under specific conditions. The effects of gravity on moving objects are influenced by their speed, as faster-moving objects experience different gravitational interactions. Concepts such as position, velocity, force, mass, and energy are theoretical frameworks rather than tangible entities. Understanding these principles requires knowledge of special relativity, general relativity, and quantum mechanics.
andreasdagen
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Im wondering if motion can be turned into matter, since I heard that motion is like stored energy.
Im not in any physics classes so I don't really know anything about the subject.

edit: I am also wondering if this is true:
Energy is effected by gravity, and movement is stored energy.
So if a object is moving fast then its more effected by gravity.

Thanks for reading, and I am sorry if I am not suposed to take two different questions in one topic.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Not so sure

Motion into matter? The usual definition for motion involves change in position over time but doesn't say anything about what is moving. Ergo, motion per se doesn't become matter.

It's more accurate to say that radiation is released when moving material objects collide with each other, and that a reverse process is also possible.

Position, velocity, force, mass, and energy are really concepts, not physical things.

With this in mind, the answer the OP was given is correct. The relevant sciences are special relativity, general relativity, and quantum mechanics. All are difficult mathematically, but general-reader introductions to them are in print.
 
Last edited:
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top