The discussion centers around the nature of photons and their mass, specifically examining the implications of Einstein's law of relative mass and the concept of mass in the context of special relativity. Participants explore whether photons can be considered massless and how they interact with the Higgs field, as well as the historical context of the term "relativistic mass."
Participants do not reach a consensus on the relevance of relativistic mass, the interaction of photons with the Higgs field, or the interpretation of mass in the context of special relativity. Multiple competing views remain throughout the discussion.
There are limitations regarding the definitions of mass and the assumptions underlying the discussion of photons and their properties. The discussion also highlights the historical context of terminology used in physics education.
Relativistic mass is an antiquated concept not used by most physicists.Albert Thomas said:The Einstein's law of relative mass is says when a particle travels at the speed of light, then it's mass becomes infinity (i.e. highly increases).
This is a nonsense statement. Particles do not "have" Higgs field. They may in general have interactions with the Higgs field that results in a mass when electroweak symmetry is broken, but the electromagnetic field does not.Albert Thomas said:Do the photons have Higg's field?
Albert Thomas said:We know that the photons are massless particles. The traveling speed of the photon is equal to the speed of the light(C). The Einstein's law of relative mass is says when a particle travels at the speed of light, then it's mass becomes infinity (i.e. highly increases). The photons are also energy particles which travels at the speed of light. Then why the photons have no mass?
No it does not. Again, relativistic mass is a deprecated concept. The only mass physicists talk about is invariant mass. We just call it "mass".bobkolker said:If a particle with non-zero rest mass is accelerated from rest its mass increases as its speed increases.
This hasn't been my experience. I just checked all of the textbooks I have, and none mentions relativistic mass. Some are from when I was in college 30+ years ago, and some are from classes I've taught during the past few years. Griffith's book on particle physics, I recall, mentioned the idea only to ridicule it.houlahound said:Some empathy for the newbs here, every textbook I have ever seen that introduces relativity defines relativistic mass as a brute fact of nature.
Basically this. Regardless, it should not need to be repeated in a thread with 7 posts.vela said:Pop-sci books, in contrast, seem to go out of their way to emphasize the idea to make relativity sound really cool and mind-blowing.
Jehannum said:A: Because it's light.
Nugatory said:Hmmmm... Should I "like" this post, or should I give @Jehannum a warning for it? There's nothing in the forum rules about bad puns...
Well, you could always do both. But I think you should give Jehannum a pass for the proper use of the it's as opposed to its.Nugatory said:Hmmmm... Should I "like" this post, or should I give @Jehannum a warning for it? There's nothing in the forum rules about bad puns...
That's funny, just yesterday I berated my PhD student for getting it wrong the other way around in his thesis draft.vela said:Well, you could always do both. But I think you should give Jehannum a pass for the proper use of the it's as opposed to its.
Orodruin said:That's funny, just yesterday I berated my PhD student for getting it wrong the other way around in his thesis draft.
Just to add a little bit on what Orodruin and Vela have already wrote to you: in case you are thinking to the equation:Albert Thomas said:We know that the photons are massless particles. The traveling speed of the photon is equal to the speed of the light(C). The Einstein's law of relative mass is says when a particle travels at the speed of light, then it's mass becomes infinity (i.e. highly increases). The photons are also energy particles which travels at the speed of light. Then why the photons have no mass?