Frame of reference and the varying mass problem

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of mass in relation to different reference frames, particularly addressing the claim that an object can have multiple masses depending on the frame of reference. Participants explore the implications of this idea and the validity of the equations presented.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant argues that there can be 21 different masses for an object based on 21 different reference frames, suggesting a relationship between mass, force, and velocity.
  • Another participant questions the validity of this claim, suggesting that the argument presented is an erroneous inversion of Newton's Second Law.
  • A third participant points out that the initial argument does not adequately address the concept of force and its transformation between frames.
  • A later reply critiques the equation for mass provided, stating it is misleading and only applicable under specific conditions, emphasizing the need for a more comprehensive understanding of mass in classical mechanics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the validity of the claim that mass can vary with reference frames. There is no consensus on the correctness of the initial argument or the equations presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the initial argument, including the lack of clarity on the force being referenced and the conditions under which the simplified mass equation applies. The discussion remains focused on the implications of these equations without resolving the underlying assumptions.

HarikrishnanSB
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hi Friends ,

I had a discussion with a funny person last night.

He said the following argument :

Suppose there are 21 objects including the one object under consideration. Each of the 21 objects move with a velocity. Since there are 21 objects, for the object we are considering has 21 velocities with respect to 21 reference frames. We are fixing the reference frame as each object.

Now since mass = (Force x Time ) / Velocity. There are 21 different mass for the same object for 21 reference frame !

I argued him saying that mass is a constant and it cannot change. But he proved me there can be 21 different masses for 21 reference frames.

How can this be possible ? ? ?

Any replies will be appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
HarikrishnanSB said:
Now since mass = (Force x Time ) / Velocity.
I suspect that this is an attempt to invert Newton's 2nd law: F = ma → m = F/a. So what?

HarikrishnanSB said:
I argued him saying that mass is a constant and it cannot change. But he proved me there can be 21 different masses for 21 reference frames.
He proved no such thing.

Why do you think he proved anything?
 
HarikrishnanSB said:
mass = (Force x Time ) / Velocity

If this is, as Doc Al suspects, an attempt to invert Newton's Second Law, it's an erroneous attempt. Acceleration is the derivative of velocity with respect to time, not the ratio of velocity to time.

Also, his argument up to that point has said nothing at all about force. What force is he talking about? And has he allowed for the fact that force also transforms between frames?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Doc Al
HarikrishnanSB said:
Now since mass = (Force x Time ) / Velocity. There are 21 different mass for the same object for 21 reference frame !

This equation for the mass is misleading. In classical mechanics the full one-dimensional equation for bodies with constant mass is

[itex]m = \frac{p}{v} = \frac{{m \cdot v_0 + \int {F \cdot dt} }}{v}[/itex]

and therefore

[itex]m = \frac{{\int {F \cdot dt} }}{{v - v_0 }}[/itex]

With vo=0 and constant Force it turns into your equation. But this simplified equation applies to special frames of reference only and therefore must not be used for transformation. The Galilean transformation of the full equation results in

[itex]m' = \frac{{\int {F' \cdot dt'} }}{{v' - v'_0 }} = \frac{{\int {F \cdot dt} }}{{\left( {v - u} \right) - \left( {v_0 - u} \right)}} = \frac{{\int {F \cdot dt} }}{{v - v_0 }} = m[/itex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 144 ·
5
Replies
144
Views
10K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K