# Is there a Charge equivalent of Mass?

## Do you really think Dark energy and Dark matter are inter-convertible?

• ### Its too speculative question to ask for this day

• Total voters
4
• Poll closed .
I have been wondering since a very long time, whether its possible that Charge and mass has some intimate relationship, like Energy-matter. You see, energy exists as energy and matter exists as matter. But, they both are inter convertible under some provided circumstances. Can that also be possible with Charge and mass? Can it be something, like on the lines of, charge equivalence of mass - much like mechanical equivalent of heat. (If yes, then the whole branch of Entropy, probability of a process' reversibility turns brilliantly exciting.)

I'd like to add few supportive points which provoked me to above question.

Point no one, I'd like to add is that, when Dark matter and Dark energy doesn't interact with normal matter or energy, does that imply that they are charge less/mass less 'things' and 'interactions'? I don't know how to explain this and hope some one is understanding this.

Second point is that, whether the quantities of matter and mass can be separated? I am speaking of the property 'mass' not merely the ability 'mass'. (This sentence, in some tiny sense, can be translated as the contrast between Gravitational mass and Inertial mass. Its not my intention though). I don't know of any particle which has mass but hasn't got the 'stuff', but I know of the vice-versa. E.g. Photon. If there exists any let me know.

These were points that made me think. Let me know either if the above two points needs to be explained or the question I asked may be answered. If so in what lines?

I tried my best to describe using the words I can, but I am not satisfied. Hope you understand what I wanted to say.

No, charge and energy are completely separate concepts and cannot be converted into each other. They must be independently conserved.

Dark matter doesn't have charge other wise it would interact with photons making it visible - not dark. But it most definitely has mass.

Your second point doesn't make sense to me. You're using the words matter, mass, and stuff in meaningless ways. The only one out of three that has a well defined meaning is mass. Matter also has definition but not as important as mass.

1 person
whether its possible that Charge and mass has some intimate relationship, like Energy-matter.

Sure, they all emanated from the big bang were everything was at one time just energy...maybe even just vacuum energy. Charge only appears in concert with mass.

edit: Not only charge and mass, but likely time and space also emerged from that single initial entity. So far, we have 'unified only three of the four forces [not gravity] in the Standard Model of particle physics. The latest look at how these MIGHT be related is under discussion in these forums under 'Amplitudhedron'....a fancy name for a possibly new computational approach.

Point no one, I'd like to add is that, when Dark matter and Dark energy doesn't interact with normal matter or energy, does that imply that they are charge less/mass less 'things' and 'interactions'? I don't know how to explain this and hope some one is understanding this.

Why not read about dark energy and dark matter? So far they ARE mysterious ['dark']but are manifest via their gravitational effects. Dark matter and energy have no origin or explanation so far in terms of particles or waves moving in space...Dark matter likely doesn't interact with the electromagnetic field,....and dark matter seems to have no strong short-range interaction, it cannot "collide", or radiate away energy,and only coalesces at galaxy scales.....

I tried my best to describe using the words I can, but I am not satisfied. Hope you understand what I wanted to say.

Not so much. Why not read about the issues, learn a few things, maybe take notes and use standard terminology to ask your questions. That will likely get you better answers. Just search using some of the terms I have posted here...maybe these forums, maybe Wikipedia, or a source you prefer.

Last edited:
1 person
You might be interested to know that in string theory, where particles are one dimensional 'strings' which vibrate in different ways, all particle characteristics are the result of different string energy vibrations. These in turn are governed [restricted] by different shaped tiny extra dimensions, like Calabi-Yau shapes. So charge is a type of energy vibration, with plus and minus a bit different. More energy means more mass.

But this is a theoretical mathematical approach so far as I know with no predictions and experimental confirmations yet. On the other hand it does hint at a fundamental link among all characteristics: energy and geometry. There are analogous links, hints, in cosmology: inflationary particle production. That's how particles appear from quantum vacuum energy and dynamic geometry...like an expanding universe.

On the other hand, string theory did not predict dark energy and the value detected was very hard for string theory to accommodate. I'm not sure if that has been resolved or not.

So far, we know of no direct, explicit, link between dark energy and dark matter.

1 person
Khashishi
There's an obvious difference between charge and mass. Charge has two polarities. Mass only has one.

1 person
The existence of charge creates an electrostatic charge that has energy and therefore a mass, so charge and mass are well related. There are models proposing that the electron mass comes from its own electrostatic field.

2 people
There's an obvious difference between charge and mass. Charge has two polarities. Mass only has one

that's a bit misleading. Charge and mass are each particle characteristics, like hair color and height are two characteristics of people.

And some particles have no charge, like the photon.

ZapperZ
Staff Emeritus