Particle Acceleration: 99.99% Light Speed & Mass

AI Thread Summary
Particles can be accelerated to 99.99% of the speed of light, leading to an increase in their relativistic mass. At this speed, a particle's mass does increase significantly, but it does not reach infinite mass, as only massless particles can travel at light speed. The discussion highlights the misconception that such particles would have mass comparable to that of Earth; instead, their mass increase is substantial but not infinite. The concept of relativistic mass is debated, with some suggesting a focus on four-vectors for a clearer understanding of relativity. Overall, while the mass of a particle at near-light speed is considerable, it does not pose a threat to planetary orbits.
Holocene
Messages
237
Reaction score
0
Particle accelerator?

I've read that we have accelerated small particles to 99.99% the speed of light.

Now, if I understand this correctly, a particles mass increases as its speed increases.

Also, if an object "having mass" was moving at the speed of light, it would have infinite mass, and therefore would require infinite energy to accelerate it to the speed of light, and since infinite energy does not exist, this is why anything having mass cannot reach light speed.

So my question is, how much more massive is small particle when it is moving at 99.99% light speed?

It seems like if it was so close to actual light speed, its mass would be huge, perhaps as much as the Earth's, and accelerating an object that close to light speed could knock the planet right out of orbit or something?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It seems to be a good idea (and is increasingly more popular) to just ignore the idea of relativistic mass altogether. You may want to find a book that describes relativity in terms of 4 vectors, such as Griffiths E&M (ch. 12 I believe).
 
Holocene said:
if it was so close to actual light speed, its mass would be huge, perhaps as much as the Earth's
Assume the particle was a proton. Come back once you've done the (trivial) maths and compared the numbers.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top