Does Relativistic Mass Change at the Speed of Light?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion clarifies that a massive body cannot achieve the speed of light, and thus the concept of relativistic mass becomes irrelevant for such bodies. Relativistic mass is essentially synonymous with energy, but it is not a useful concept in General Relativity (GR) for computing gravitational effects. Instead, modern treatments of Special Relativity (SR) often omit relativistic mass in favor of more effective definitions of mass, such as Komar, ADM, and Bondi masses, which are better suited for specific problems in GR.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Special Relativity (SR)
  • Familiarity with General Relativity (GR)
  • Knowledge of mass-energy equivalence
  • Basic concepts of gravitational effects in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the Komar mass definition in General Relativity
  • Explore ADM and Bondi masses and their applications
  • Study the implications of mass-energy equivalence in modern physics
  • Investigate the reasons for the decline in the use of relativistic mass in contemporary literature
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of theoretical physics, and anyone interested in the nuances of mass definitions in Special and General Relativity.

jishitha
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
Hi.. What will be the nature of relativistic mass when a body moves with speed of light..?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You're in luck. There's a website devoted to your question:

http://www.relativisticmass.com
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A massive body cannot move at the speed of light, and a mass-less body does not allow a good definition of relativistic mass.
 
Relativisitc mass is just another name for energy, so a light wave has some. However its wrong to ascribe gravity as being a force due to relativistic mass (though if you're lucky you'll be within a factor of 2 of the correct answer. For instance, you'll get only half the expected deflection of light by using a quasi-Newtonian approach.)

"Relativistic mass" is an SR concept that is not particularly useful in GR, and pretty much of a dead end. The good news is it can be defined, the bad news is it's not particularly good for anything, including computing gravity, and the things that it can do can be done just as well if not better by other means.

So if you're asking about the relativistic mass of light in order to compute the gravitational effect of light, you're asking the wrong question.

Many modern SR treatments of SR don't even bother with relativistic mass anymore, though you'll find the occasionall odd enthusiast of the topic, and an occasional textbook reference (mostly in older textbooks).

"Relativistic mass" seems very appealing to the mass media and lay audience more than it's use in the professional literature for some reason.

Good relativistic treatments of mass by General Relativity are a fairly advanced subject in general relativity. In the current state of the art, there is not one, but several competing definitions of mass, each of which can be applied to their own class of problem.

The Komar mass, which applies to static space times, is one of the simplest. A few other examples are ADM and Bondi masses, and there are others, though these are probalby the 3 most common.
 
Thaaanks...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 102 ·
4
Replies
102
Views
7K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K