Idea of increased mass at relativistic speeds

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mitchellmckain
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Idea Mass Relativistic
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of increased mass at relativistic speeds, particularly in the context of special relativity. Participants explore whether the idea of mass increasing with velocity is a useful explanatory tool or a source of confusion. The conversation includes theoretical considerations, personal interpretations, and challenges to the conventional understanding of mass and energy in relativistic contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the idea of mass increasing at relativistic speeds is a flawed explanatory tool, suggesting it creates more confusion than clarity in understanding special relativity.
  • One participant emphasizes that mass should not be considered relative and that the term "rest mass" is more appropriate, as it does not change with velocity.
  • Another participant challenges the notion that mass is a function of speed, suggesting that the relationship between mass and energy is more complex than simply stating m = gamma m0.
  • Some participants express that the concept of relativistic mass can lead to misconceptions about how acceleration affects mass and energy, arguing that nothing fundamentally changes as an object accelerates.
  • A non-physicist participant reflects on the philosophical implications of mass as an invariant quantity, contrasting it with pre-Einstein physics.
  • There is a question raised about the utility of the relativistic mass concept, with some participants finding it clear and useful while others do not.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the usefulness of the concept of relativistic mass. Some find it confusing and unnecessary, while others argue that it works well for their understanding. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the validity and clarity of the concept.

Contextual Notes

Participants express differing views on the definitions and implications of mass and energy in relativistic contexts, highlighting the complexity of these concepts and the potential for misunderstanding. There is an acknowledgment that the relationship between mass and velocity is not straightforward and may depend on specific interpretations.

  • #91
lucien86 said:
The real problem with dilation is that no real experiments have been done. We know how single particles behave, but if large objects carry their own inertial frame they may simply ignore relativity completely. The physics of large objects at relativistic speeds is basically completely unknown.
Of course there have been experiments done! Such as the experiment with the atomic clocks - one in a plane and one on the ground.

lucien86 said:
If Einstein is truly correct then Quantum entanglement cannot exist

No information can be sent with QE.

lucien86 said:
A very interesting thing happens if you make c infinite - relativity becomes linear - Newtonian!

How exactly do you do that?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #92
Also, the GPS (global positioning system) has to compensate for time differences caused by both it's velocity and gravitational field differences between it and the surface of the Earth in calculating position so accuratly.

The c boundary is not so much that things become imaginary, but to even get an imaginary number you have to go through infinity. Even in quantum mechanics particles could never penetrate such a boundary. You would have to have infinite uncertainty in the energy and momentum of the particle, which means you could never detect it.
 
  • #93
daniel_i_l said:
No information can be sent with QE.
That may not be true. There has been theoretical research in this area and published in journals such as American Journal of Physics. References provided upon request.

Pete
 
  • #94
Is it that no information can be sent, or that it can't be sent faster than light? I'd be interested to learn more about that because one might argue that in seperating two entagled particles to such a distance where the speed of light becomes significant, you still have to carry the particle (ie the information) less than c and so nothing is really violated.
 
  • #95
Longstreet said:
Is it that no information can be sent, or that it can't be sent faster than light? I'd be interested to learn more about that because one might argue that in seperating two entagled particles to such a distance where the speed of light becomes significant, you still have to carry the particle (ie the information) less than c and so nothing is really violated.
If a signal can travel faster than the speed of light then you can devise a situation where causality is violated.

Pete
 
  • #96
pmb_phy said:
That may not be true. There has been theoretical research in this area and published in journals such as American Journal of Physics. References provided upon request.
Pete

provide them.
 
  • #97
References:
Faster than Light?, Chiao et al, Scientific American, Aug. 1993

Can EPR-correlations be used for the transmission of superluminal signals?, P. Mittlestaedt, Ann. Phys., 7, 1998, 711-715

Superluminal signal velocity, G. Nimtz, Ann. Phys., 7, 1998, 618-624

Bell's theorem: Does quantum mechanics contradict relativity?, L.E. Ballentine, Am. J. Phys., 55(8), Aug. 1987

Possibility of Faster-Than-Light Particles, G. Fienberg, Physical Review, Volume 159, No. 5, July 25, 1987 (this is the paper which postulated the posibility of tachyons)

Pete
 
  • #98
If We have two Atoms.

1. Atom A. is a Hydrogen Atom at rest.
2. Atom B. is a Hydrogen Atom traveling at half the speed of light or 93,141 miles a second.

Question is, How big is Atom B. compared to Atom A. Exactly?

What are their size differences?
 
Last edited:
  • #99
Intuitive said:
If We have two Atoms.
1. Atom A. is a Hydrogen Atom at rest.
2. Atom B. is a Hydrogen Atom traveling at Light speed.
Question is, How big is Atom B. compared to Atom A. Exactly?
What are their size differences?
Nothing can travel at the speed of light so please rephrase your question. Thanks.

Pete
 
  • #100
lucien86 said:
What is it with physicists? This almost religious conviction that Mr Einstein must MUST be right. In reality relativity is a pretty fragile beast,
Not every single prediction of relativity has been tested, for example I don't know of any observations of length contraction (which would be rather difficult in practice). However, practically all tests so far have supported predictions of relativity, and the few that apparently don't, have problems:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
 
  • #101
jtbell said:
Not every single prediction of relativity has been tested, for example I don't know of any observations of length contraction (which would be rather difficult in practice). However, practically all tests so far have supported predictions of relativity, and the few that apparently don't, have problems:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
Predictions of the results of experiments which were derived from the concept of length contraction can readily be tested in the laboratory and they concern current carrying wires. See

http://www.geocities.com/physics_world/em/rotating_magnet.htm

and scroll down to where it says "Charged Density on a Moving Wire."

Pete
 
  • #102
Intuitive said:
If We have two Atoms.
1. Atom A. is a Hydrogen Atom at rest.
2. Atom B. is a Hydrogen Atom traveling at Light speed.
Question is, How big is Atom B. compared to Atom A. Exactly?
What are their size differences?

I will take it that you mean almost the speed of light such as 99.995% the speed of light because the faster you approach light the more and more energy you add to go faster but this energy just goes to the mass so you never get to the speed exactly.

I can't give you the exact equation but you can look on this site if you want for the equation:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html
 
  • #103
pmb_phy said:
Predictions of the results of experiments which were derived from the concept of length contraction can readily be tested in the laboratory and they concern current carrying wires.

Yes, of course. I was referring to "direct" observations of length contraction, similar to our direct observations of time dilation. Most relativity skeptics probably wouldn't be satisfied with indirect observations. :frown:
 
  • #104
jtbell said:
Yes, of course. I was referring to "direct" observations of length contraction, similar to our direct observations of time dilation. Most relativity skeptics probably wouldn't be satisfied with indirect observations. :frown:
Correction. Most relativity skeptics can't be satisfied, period. :cry:

Pete
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Escape velocity near a black hole: Newtonian or Special Relativity?
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
High School What is m in Kinetic Energy? Relativistic mass or Rest mass?
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
6K
High School Experimental evidence for effective mass increasing with speed
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Undergrad Inertial Mass as Speedometer: Physics & Universe
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
Undergrad Question on the energy needed to go at a relativistic speed
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
High School Speed of light and this Accelerating Rocket scenario
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
Undergrad Refractive index of a medium in relativistic motion
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
High School What if we use a non physical reference point to measure an object's mass?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Undergrad Deriving the relativistic rocket equation with exhaust efficiency
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
High School Relationship between mass and energy
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K