Questioning speed of light and infinite mass

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of Einstein's theories regarding the speed of light, mass, and gravitational effects. Participants explore concepts related to relativistic mass, the behavior of photons, and the gravitational influence of energy and mass in various contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question how photons can remain nearly massless while objects with mass approach infinite mass as they near the speed of light.
  • It is noted that photons have zero rest mass, and only objects with non-zero rest mass experience an increase in relativistic mass.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of accelerating electrons to near-light speeds and whether this could affect Earth's orbit, with some arguing that the relativistic mass of the electron-Earth system remains constant.
  • Participants discuss the mass equivalence of light and its ability to curve space, with one noting that the mass equivalence of light produced by many light bulbs is relatively small.
  • There is a debate about whether energy affects gravitational attraction, with some asserting that it does, while others insist that only rest mass is relevant for gravitational effects.
  • One participant expresses confusion about the relationship between energy, mass, and gravity, seeking clarification on the role of pressure in gravitational effects.
  • A later post introduces a complex explanation involving gravitational reactions and mass-energy exchanges, which some participants find difficult to understand.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between energy, mass, and gravity, with no consensus reached on whether energy contributes to gravitational attraction. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of relativistic mass and gravitational effects.

Contextual Notes

Some claims rely on specific definitions of mass and energy, and there are unresolved mathematical steps regarding the implications of relativistic mass on gravitational interactions.

btgream
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
If Einstein's theories are correct, specifically about objects approaching the speed of light and their mass approaching infinity, how is it that a photon (and object with mass or mostly energy) is able to remain nearly massless? Why doesn't an electron fired through a particle accelerator approach near infinite mass and throw the Earth out of orbit? or worse? Are the equations wrong to presume that all matter at the speed of light reaches infinite mass? Why doesn't light also curve space?

- An uneducated curiosity

http://members.fortunecity.com/templarseries/Yahoo/Omegaman/relativity/REL7.gif

[PLAIN]http://members.fortunecity.com/templarseries/Yahoo/Omegaman/relativity/REL7.gif [/PLAIN]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
btgream said:
If Einstein's theories are correct, specifically about objects approaching the speed of light and their mass approaching infinity, how is it that a photon (and object with mass or mostly energy) is able to remain nearly massless?
Photons have zero rest mass. Only objects with non-zero rest masses would have an increase in relativistic mass.
Why doesn't an electron fired through a particle accelerator approach near infinite mass and throw the Earth out of orbit? or worse?
Accelerating an electron up to 99.9999995% percent of the speed of light (about the highest accelerators have achieved) would increase its mass by a factor of ~100,000, since the rest mass of an electron is only 9 e_31 kg to begin with, you would only be increasing its mass to around that of an average atom.
Secondly, the energy to accelerate the electron has to come from the Earth, and this would reduce the relativistic mass of the Earth. IOW, the Relativistic mass of the electron-Earth total would stay constant.
Are the equations wrong to presume that all matter at the speed of light reaches infinite mass? Why doesn't light also curve space?
It does, But the mass equivalence of light is quite small. The light put out by 1 billion 100w light bulbs in one year only has a mass equivalence of ~35 kg.
- An uneducated curiosity
 
Also, as a slight addition to the above, as an object increases in speed, it gains mass-energy or relativistic mass, the rest mass does not change, and it is rest mass, not mass-energy that judges gravitational attraction, so it would do no such thing to Earth's orbit, even if it received energy from somewhere else.
 
Vorde said:
Also, as a slight addition to the above, as an object increases in speed, it gains mass-energy or relativistic mass, the rest mass does not change, and it is rest mass, not mass-energy that judges gravitational attraction, so it would do no such thing to Earth's orbit, even if it received energy from somewhere else.

This is false, energy affects gravitation as well as rest mass.
 
Really? I'm sorry I wouldn't have posted that if I hadn't heard it before, I'll have to look back to where I heard that, because I would have sworn I was right.

EDIT: You're completely right, however I definitely picked that up from a previous thread here where I was swayed from my previous (correct) viewpoint, so I think someone here taught me wrong! :P
 
Good lesson illustrated above...you can't believe everything you read, even here.

Some people get really bent when you disagree with them, tell them they are wrong, but unless it is done someone else may well learn the wrong thing.

While we are on the subject of gravity, mass, energy and PRESSURE all have gravitational effects. And that includes dark energy and dark matter although we currently have little knowledge about just what they are.
 
That all makes sense to me except the pressure part, would you mind elaborating?
 
Matterwave said:
This is false, energy affects gravitation as well as rest mass.

Gravitational reactions dictates how E works, it's just Sf into TMass and Bmass around a Scatter Matrix of E exchange of any Mass. This is a Presurfistic Event of Natural Occurrence where the (h) can be achieved. The end result is folic in Curve function between two given Masses. The W function into TMass and BMass (L) at h now becomes a Bmass and the Directional Force creates a Tmass (D). The Presurfistic Event is the exchange of E of 2 given Masses.
 
Not to be rude, but, what?
 
  • #10
Elaborating on the previous posts you had the right idea and the function could also determine that outcome. I explained the example to you because it isn't One Dimensional anymore on x or y scales. The 2 Masses I was referring to explains you're hypothesis, but you need 2 colliding Masses to achieve this. As I said Lmass has a T and BMass and DMass has the same Masses it's the Presurfistic Event that occurs between the 2 Masses that determines the h exchange. I hope that explains the interjection
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
  • · Replies 130 ·
5
Replies
130
Views
16K
  • · Replies 64 ·
3
Replies
64
Views
12K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K