What Are the Relationships Between Mass and Time?

[Dezepar]

Can someone shed light on any and all relationships between mass and time?

 

[Arcon]

Originally posted by Dezepar
Can someone shed light on any and all relationships between mass and time?

I know of no such relation in classical mechanics or quantum mechanics. However in relativity the mass of a particle depends on the location the particle is in a gravitational field and on the particles velocity. These alterations in mass are directly attributable to time dilation effects. i.e. time dilation and mass changes are one in the same phenomena.

 

[Dezepar]

Is there any worthwhile information documented or working theories, (with at least an ounce of plausibility) in regards to there being a definitive relationship between mass and time? I have done extensive 'googling' on this but would like more opinions.

 

[Arcon]

Originally posted by Dezepar
Is there any worthwhile information documented or working theories, (with at least an ounce of plausibility) in regards to there being a definitive relationship between mass and time? I have done extensive 'googling' on this but would like more opinions.

It really depends on what you mean by mass though. There is proper mass and relativistic mass. The former is an intrinsic property of a particle while the relativisitci mass describes the inertial properties of the body, i.e. its the "m" in p = mv.

As regards the gravitational properties of that later Einstein discusses this to some extent in his book "The Meaning of Relativity." There is more on mass in articles listed here

http://www.geocities.com/physics_world/mass_articles.htm

Are you referring to proper mass or relativisitc mass?

 

[Dezepar]

Thanx a ton Arcon. I actually have reasons for asking this question, but its obvious I should probably immerse myself into a few texts first. I am what you may want to call a 'weekend physicist', or a physics wannabe for a more direct and accurate term, (I'm a programmer by trade) but have always loved physics. Any help on pushing me in the right direction for a deeper understanding of classical and quantum physics would be greatly appreciated. I guess my skill level would be negative novice. (Heh)

Are you referring to proper mass or relativisitc mass?

From my limited knowledge I can only tell you that I'm referring to relativistic mass. Nothing more.
On a different note, I think there is some kind of subliminal messaging going on at this forum, for I have been GLUED to it since I discovered it! Seriously though, what a great place this site is, I've been wondering how the heck I ever survived previously without it. Thanx, and kudos to all the 'super minds' here and I'm greatly humbled in the presence of them.

 

[Moni]

Hmm...Let me try a little ;)

E = MC^2
and we know C = s/t
(s = distance)
Then,

E = M * (s/t)^2
E = M * s^2/t^2
t^2 = (1/(E*s^2)) M

t = sqrt(1/(E*s^2)) sqrt(M)

so, if Energy and Distance remains CONSTANT then,

t OC sqrt(M)

Hmm...

 

[Dezepar]

Your reply, Moni, coincides with Arcon's post.

I know of no such relation in classical mechanics or quantum mechanics.

I understand this. I was wondering if there were ANY theorys, founded or not. Demonstrable or not. The equations you present are mostly greek to me at this moment, as I am an untrained individual in this field. (Currently working to change that.) Thanx for the arithmatic rebuttle though.

 

[simonbaumber]

One theory is that time is not constant and flows like a river in some places it travels faster than others. In fact time travel is theoreticly possible as time around certian objects moves at different speeds. for example the bigger an object the slower time travels around it. this therefore means that if you were to stand next to a pyramid (large mass) and look at someone far away they would be moving at a faster speed (too small a difference to notice.) and obviously to them you would be moving slower. This is the same with astronaughts going to outerspace, as the Earth is so massive the people still on the Earth would be going through time at a slower speed (due to the shear mass of the earth) and the astronaughts would be moving faster as they are away from any huge mass. for the record there is no such thing as the ageing gene and the reson you age quicker in space is due to my just explaind theory. And the atmosphere in space dose not speed up the ageing prosess as you would be in a space suit anyway! (that last bit was aimed at my dumb *** friend who belives this and many other rediculas theories of which he belives makes him sounds cleaver explaining this to the lesser minded folk.

Excuse my grammer i may not be ace at it but i know what I am on about when it comes to Cosmology. or do i??... DUN DUN DUN!

 

[Freefall84]

im sorry, simon, I am sure you're wrong, woafully so, the atmosphere we're immersed in does not effect the passage of time or the "ageing gene", although I am sure mass does (only in minute proportions) there are satellites in orbit with atomic clocks onboard. and those clock (although synchronized with the same clocks on earth) run slower than normal there is definitely a link between mass and time but humanity hasn't put a precise number against it yet, :)

 

[Drakkith]

im sorry, simon, I am sure you're wrong, woafully so, the atmosphere we're immersed in does not effect the passage of time or the "ageing gene", although I am sure mass does (only in minute proportions) there are satellites in orbit with atomic clocks onboard. and those clock (although synchronized with the same clocks on earth) run slower than normal there is definitely a link between mass and time but humanity hasn't put a precise number against it yet, :)

Actually we have a very very precise number for this. If we didn't then GPS wouldn't work. We have a lot of very solid evidence that mass directly affects time. Just look up "evidence for relativity" on google and you will find lots.

 

[russ_watters]

Responses to a 4 month old response to a 6 year old thread... Locking.