Mass, Velocity and Special Relativity

AI Thread Summary
Mass is not an ultimate product of velocity, as relativistic mass increase is only observed from different reference frames. An observer stationary with respect to Earth measures its mass as constant, regardless of its motion through space. If Earth were removed from its orbit and slowed down, its mass would remain unchanged for observers in the same frame. However, an observer on Alpha Centauri would perceive a change in Earth's mass due to relative motion. The concept of "moving" versus "stationary" is arbitrary and depends on the observer's frame of reference.
Irishwake
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
Is mass an ultimate product of velocity? If we were somehow able to take the Earth out of it's orbit about the Sun and then somehow slow it such that it was no longer rotating with the rest of the Milky Way would its mass decrease?

There are a million factors here but universal expansion aside, and assuming this were possible does the "math" say this would in fact happen?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Irishwake said:
Is mass an ultimate product of velocity? If we were somehow able to take the Earth out of it's orbit about the Sun and then somehow slow it such that it was no longer rotating with the rest of the Milky Way would its mass decrease?

There are a million factors here but universal expansion aside, and assuming this were possible does the "math" say this would in fact happen?

No. Relativistic mass increase is an effect seen by an observer in a different reference frame (i.e. relative motion wrt Earth). Anyone in the same reference frame as Earth measures Earth's mass as unchanging.

So, whether zooming around the galaxy or floating out in the void, we measure Earth's mass to be the same.

Now, that being said, someone sitting on A. Centauri would measure Earth's mass differently - at first it was stationary wrt A.Centauri when they were both in the galaxy, but when Earth is transported to the void, it now has relative velocity, and A.Centauri would measure an increase in Earth
's mass.

Note that "moving" versus "stationary" is completely arbitrary. It has nothing to do with whether Earth is moving or whether A.Centauri is the one moving. You'd see the exact same thing if you left Earth where it was and instead passed by it in a rocket at the same speed.
 
Last edited:
Well that settles that, thanks for the quick reply!
 
Publication: Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars Article: NASA Says Mars Rover Discovered Potential Biosignature Last Year Press conference The ~100 authors don't find a good way this could have formed without life, but also can't rule it out. Now that they have shared their findings with the larger community someone else might find an explanation - or maybe it was actually made by life.
Today at about 4:30 am I saw the conjunction of Venus and Jupiter, where they were about the width of the full moon, or one half degree apart. Did anyone else see it? Edit: The moon is 2,200 miles in diameter and at a distance of 240,000 miles. Thereby it subtends an angle in radians of 2,200/240,000=.01 (approximately). With pi radians being 180 degrees, one radian is 57.3 degrees, so that .01 radians is about .50 degrees (angle subtended by the moon). (.57 to be more exact, but with...
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Back
Top