Spontaneous mass formation from Energy

In summary, there is a concept of concentration of energy that is necessary for the formation of particles with mass. This can be measured by the amount of energy needed to form the mass of the particle, as in pair production, or by the kinetic energies involved in a particle collision. However, there may be other factors at play, such as the size of the target particle and the intersection of multiple energy sources. This concept is not fully defined or understood, but it is an important consideration in understanding the formation of particles with mass.
Gold Member
At certain concentrations of energy, there is the possibility of particles with mass forming. How does one measure "concentration of energy": by the wavelength? Or energy density? At what concentration will this occur, and why?

At certain concentrations of energy, there is the possibility of particles with mass forming. How does one measure "concentration of energy": by the wavelength? Or energy density? At what concentration will this occur, and why?

You seem to be ignoring mass-energy equivalence. The answer is one of the best known equations in the world: E=MC^2...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass–energy_equivalence

Thank you, nismaratwork, but this does not answer the question: perhaps I need to be more explicit. That is, the fact that mass and energy are equivalent is supposed in my question. The Wiki article talks about a few cases of mass-energy equivalence (relativistic mass, binding energy, etc.), but does not go into the cases where a large amount of energy in a small space produces a particle with mass, for example in supercollider collisions. If you take the same amount of energy which produces a new massive particle in such a collision and spread it out in space, no such particle is formed. Hence there must be some measure of how concentrated this energy must be. This is a consideration that is not contained in the famous formula. So, I repeat: what is this measure?

Thank you, nismaratwork, but this does not answer the question: perhaps I need to be more explicit. That is, the fact that mass and energy are equivalent is supposed in my question. The Wiki article talks about a few cases of mass-energy equivalence (relativistic mass, binding energy, etc.), but does not go into the cases where a large amount of energy in a small space produces a particle with mass, for example in supercollider collisions. If you take the same amount of energy which produces a new massive particle in such a collision and spread it out in space, no such particle is formed. Hence there must be some measure of how concentrated this energy must be. This is a consideration that is not contained in the famous formula. So, I repeat: what is this measure?

This should be obvious: enough to form the mass of the relevant particle. When you consider how much energy that is... not a shock that it's pretty much just pair creation-annihilation going on.

Thanks again,nismaratwork, but apparently I am still not being clear enough. So I might now go in the opposite direction and be a bit wordy.

As you say:
This should be obvious: enough to form the mass of the relevant particle.

This tells me how much energy. This might come from the KE of the particles in a particle collision, or a concentrated energy beam concentrated on a small enough target, or simply a photon in a pair production. In the pair production, it is clear that all the energy is in a single photon, and hence the "concentration" is defined by the wavelength of the photon corresponding to this energy. However, I am concerned about the other two cases.

First: the collision: The intuitive answer is that the collision must be "point-blank", but this does not really make sense as the two particles do not end up in precisely the same point. Another intuitive answer is that one just calculates the necessary kinetic energies and then calculates the mean distance that the particles can get to each other, but I am not sure if this is necessary or sufficient, and whether there is an easier way.

Secondly, as an example one justification for the interpretation of the Planck length as a minimum length is that attempting to measure something at a distance less than a Planck length results in a creating a black hole, shielding more precise knowledge, and this can be seen as a special case of energy to matter conversion. For the more general case, another intuitive answer is that the energy has to be concentrated on a particle, as photons don't directly combine, and that the incoming n photons have to raise the energy level of the particle in n appropriate steps before the particle has a chance to jumps down energy levels, and the particle has to then jump down all n energy levels at once to combine all the energy into one photon, so that the positions that the electrons have to be at will depend on the mean size of the target particle at the different energy levels... but this answer is not very satisfactory.

In any case, there appears to be a concept not only of the amount of energy, but also in the case of more than one energy source there is apparently some concept of a volume of space and a period of time in which the individual energies must intersect in order for particle production to take place. It is assuredly some standard concept, and it is this concept or method that I am looking for.

1. What is spontaneous mass formation from energy?

Spontaneous mass formation from energy is a theoretical concept in physics that suggests that mass can be created from energy without the presence of any external particles or fields.

2. How is spontaneous mass formation from energy possible?

This phenomenon is possible due to the fundamental equation E=mc^2, which states that energy and mass are equivalent. When a sufficient amount of energy is present, it can spontaneously convert into mass.

3. Can spontaneous mass formation from energy be observed?

At this time, spontaneous mass formation from energy has not been observed or proven to occur in any experiments. It remains a theoretical concept and further research is needed to understand its potential implications.

4. What are the potential applications of spontaneous mass formation from energy?

If proven to be possible, spontaneous mass formation from energy could have significant implications for our understanding of the universe and potentially lead to new technologies in energy production and propulsion.

5. Are there any controversies surrounding spontaneous mass formation from energy?

Yes, the concept of spontaneous mass formation from energy is a highly debated and controversial topic in the scientific community. Some scientists argue that it goes against established laws of physics, while others believe it could provide answers to some of the biggest mysteries in physics.

• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
543
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
18
Views
983
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
34
Views
3K
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
474
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
9
Views
2K
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
1K
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
2K
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
24
Views
2K
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
13
Views
2K
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
14
Views
1K