How we know which mass would be heavier.

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Twich
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mass
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of relativistic mass in the context of the theory of relativity, particularly how the mass of an object changes with its velocity and how this affects measurements from different reference frames. Participants explore theoretical implications, calculations related to acceleration, and questions regarding the relativistic mass of a rocket compared to the Earth.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the theory of relativity indicates that an observer measures the mass of a moving object to be greater than when it is at rest, depending on the observer's frame of reference.
  • Others clarify that the idea of relativistic mass increase has fallen out of favor, suggesting a focus on energy instead, using the equation ##E^2=(pc)^2+(m_0c^2)^2##.
  • There are questions about how to calculate acceleration when a force is applied to a mass, with some proposing that only the rest mass (m0) is considered for inertia.
  • Participants discuss specific cases of acceleration, providing formulas for transverse and longitudinal forces, and defining the Lorentz factor (gamma).
  • Questions are raised about the relativistic mass (energy) of a rocket relative to the Earth, including whether the relativistic masses of both are equal and the implications of their total energies from different frames of reference.
  • One participant notes that the total energy of the Earth, as viewed from the rocket's frame, is significantly greater than that of the rocket as viewed from the Earth's frame.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the concept of relativistic mass and its relevance, with some supporting traditional interpretations while others advocate for a shift towards energy-based perspectives. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of relativistic mass in practical calculations and the specific questions posed about the rocket and Earth.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made about relativistic mass and its application in various scenarios, as well as the dependence on definitions of mass and energy in different reference frames.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying relativity, physics students exploring concepts of mass and energy, and individuals curious about the implications of relativistic effects in different frames of reference.

Twich
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
The theory describes that the faster the mass travels , the heavier it is. But since everythig is relatively measure its velocity. Then How we know which mass would be heavier ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Twich said:
The theory describes that the faster the mass travels , the heavier it is. But since everything is relatively measure its velocity. Then How we know which mass would be heavier ?

The theory of relativity does not say that the faster a mass travels, the heavier it is.

It says (or used to say - see below) that an observer will measure the mass of an object moving relative to him to be greater than the mass of the same object at rest relative to him. If you have two objects that would have the same mass if measured while at rest, and they're moving relative to one other... An observer moving along with (at rest relative to) the first object would say that the second object has increased its mass because of its relative velocity, and an observer moving along with (at rest relative to) the second object would say the same thing about the first object.

So you are right - we can't say which object is "really" heavier because it all depends on your point of view.

------
Be aware, however, that the idea of relativistic mass increase fell out of favor some decades ago. It's a valid way of thinking about relativity, but a mathematically cleaner and more powerful approach is to focus on the energy of the moving object instead, using the equation ##E^2=(pc)^2+(m_0c^2)^2## where ##p## is the momentum and ##m_0## is the mass of the object as measured by an observer who is at rest relative to that object.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Nugatory said:
The theory of relativity does not say that the faster a mass travels, the heavier it is.

It says (or used to say - see below) that an observer will measure the mass of an object moving relative to him to be greater than the mass of the same object at rest relative to him. If you have two objects that would have the same mass if measured while at rest, and they're moving relative to one other... An observer moving along with (at rest relative to) the first object would say that the second object has increased its mass because of its relative velocity, and an observer moving along with (at rest relative to) the second object would say the same thing about the first object.

So you are right - we can't say which object is "really" heavier because it all depends on your point of view.

------
Be aware, however, that the idea of relativistic mass increase fell out of favor some decades ago. It's a valid way of thinking about relativity, but a mathematically cleaner and more powerful approach is to focus on the energy of the moving object instead, using the equation ##E^2=(pc)^2+(m_0c^2)^2## where ##p## is the momentum and ##m_0## is the mass of the object as measured by an observer who is at rest relative to that object.

About mass, because relativistic mass is concerned as enerygy or momentum, how to calculate the accerelation of the mass when force F on it. Only m0 is considered as its inertia, isn't it?

and another question?
A rocket speed v relative to the earth.
1. how much relativistic mass (energy) of the rocket?
2. how much relativistic mass (energy) of the earth?
3. are both relativistic mass equal ? why?
 
Twich said:
About mass, because relativistic mass is concerned as enerygy or momentum, how to calculate the accerelation of the mass when force F on it. Only m0 is considered as its inertia, isn't it?
Easy cases:

Steering an object by a transverse force: a= F/(m0*gamma)

Changing the speed of an object slightly by a longitudinal force: a= F/(m0*gamma³)

A difficult case:

Changing the speed of an object a lot: the relativistic mass changesSome definitions:

gamma is the lorentz factor, which is very close to one at normal speeds, and becomes larger than one at relativistic speeds.
gamma= 1 / sqrt(1-(v²/c²))

relativistic mass = m0 * gamma
transverse mass = same as relativistic mass
longitudinal mass = m0*gamma³
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
jartsa said:
Easy cases:

Steering an object by a transverse force: a= F/(m0*gamma)

Changing the speed of an object slightly by a longitudinal force: a= F/(m0*gamma³)

A difficult case:

Changing the speed of an object a lot: the relativistic mass changes


Some definitions:

gamma is the lorentz factor, which is very close to one at normal speeds, and becomes larger than one at relativistic speeds.
gamma= 1 / sqrt(1-(v²/c²))

relativistic mass = m0 * gamma
transverse mass = same as relativistic mass
longitudinal mass = m0*gamma³

Still have three question left!
 
Twich said:
and another question?
A rocket speed v relative to the earth.
1. how much relativistic mass (energy) of the rocket?
2. how much relativistic mass (energy) of the earth?
3. are both relativistic mass equal ? why?

The total energy of the Earth, as viewed from the frame of the rocket, is FAR greater than that of the rocket when viewed from the frame of the Earth.

To figure out the total energy of each, plug their mass and momentum into the equation linked in post 2.
Also, have a look at the Relativistic Momentum section of the following link: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/relmom.html#c3
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
That's actually a good question, I'd like to read more replies
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • · Replies 143 ·
5
Replies
143
Views
10K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
6K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
6K