Go Back   Science Forums Biology Forum Molecular Biology Forum Physics Chemistry Forum > General Science Forums > Physics Forum
Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Physics Forum Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.


- Rest Mass ? -

- Rest Mass ? - - Physics Forum

- Rest Mass ? - - Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-15-2003, 08:38 AM
''
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default - Rest Mass ? -



[Only registered users see links. ] \(formerly\) (dlzc1.cox@net), in article nntp:/<D1zQa.7165$u51.2965@fed1read05> , wrote:
quoted Dear Jeff Relf:


Because, on average, neither the billiard ball nor its contents
are moving relative to your frame of reference. The same would be true if
the thing were spinning, and these wave-particles you speak of don't
escape certain "orbits" of brownian motion and nuclear spin.

A question on a tangent to yours is whether a spinning billiard
ball would gain mass according to its rate of spin or if it would gain
mass according to its temperature.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-15-2003, 12:20 PM
Pmb
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default - Rest Mass ? -


"''" <brewhaha@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message
news:f4PQa.3007$Fy1.136496@localhost...
nntp:/<D1zQa.7165$u51.2965@fed1read05> , wrote:

A spinning ball has more kinetic energy than a ball at rest. So yes. It
would weight more i.e. it's mass increases

Pmb


Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-15-2003, 01:27 PM
dlzc@aol.com \(formerly\)
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default - Rest Mass ? -

Dear Pmb:

"Pmb" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:IkSQa.2985$[Only registered users see links. ]...
....

Its RELATIVISTIC mass increases. Its RELATIVISTIC mass increases for both
increasing spin and increasing temperature.

David A. Smith


Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-15-2003, 02:54 PM
Pmb
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default - Rest Mass ? -


"dlzc@aol.com (formerly)" <dlzc1.cox@net> wrote in message
newsjTQa.8471$u51.3725@fed1read05...

In this case the rest mass increases as well. Think of what "rest mass"
means. It's the mass as measured in the frame of referance in which the
total momentum is zero. Think of a top which is at rest and not spinning in
frame S. The mass is m_o. Now start spinning the top in a way such that the
total momentum is zero. Then in S the total energy has increased and
therefore the total mass in this frame - i.e. the total rest mass has
increase. The mass went from m_o to m'_o > m_o.

Pmb


Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-15-2003, 04:40 PM
Sam Wormley
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default - Rest Mass ? -

Pmb wrote:

And the formulation is?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-15-2003, 04:59 PM
Pmb
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default - Rest Mass ? -


"Sam Wormley" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered users see links. ]...
in
the

Let E_o = total energy in the rest frame. Then the rest mass M_o will be

M_o = E_o/c^2

The additional mass comes from the kinetic energy of all the parts of the
body

Pmb


Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-15-2003, 07:26 PM
Old Man
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default - Rest Mass ? -

Pmb <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:UpWQa.3767$[Only registered users see links. ]...
mass"
the
spinning
that

For once, Pmb is correct, but what is the formula? For mall
rotation rate, Omega, and angular moment of inertia, I0, it might be

M0*c^2 = m0*c^2 + (1 / 2) I0*Omega^2

But what is the relativistic formula? [Old Man]







Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-15-2003, 07:49 PM
Pmb
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default - Rest Mass ? -


"Old Man" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message news:3f13035f_1@newsfeed...
has
the

I'm always correct. :-) Especially since I never take a stand here on
anything that I'm not 100% certain of.



Very complex. Not sure if there is a simple formula.

If it was as easy as just adding up the kinetic energies of all the pieces
then that would be it. However to keep the pieces attached to the body (i.e.
hold particles at a fixed distance from the center of rotatio) one has to
force them to follow a circular path. That means that a rotating body is
under stress - and that stress contributes to the energy in the zero
momentum frame.

Pmb


Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-16-2003, 02:32 AM
Bruce Pew
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default - Rest Mass ? -

"Pmb" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message news:<yVYQa.106$[Only registered users see links. ]>...

Hilarious. What is 100% dertain is the brown probability amplitude for
being wrong is closer to unity than zero.

Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-16-2003, 07:48 AM
Jeff Relf
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default - E / c^2 -

Pmb wrote :
" Let E_o = total energy in the rest frame .
Then the rest mass M_o will be M_o = E_o / c^2
The additional mass comes from the kinetic energy
of all the parts of the body .


Cool !

This is easy to understand ,
add spin or heat and they rest mass goes up by E / c^2 .
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
mass , rest


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
PHYSICS, Ex Chao Ordo Donald G. Shead Physics Forum 2 01-03-2012 11:26 AM
What is Gravity? sdr@sdrodrian.com Physics Forum 1 01-27-2008 02:53 PM
The Achilles Heel of String Theory. S D Rodrian Physics Forum 7 07-08-2006 02:40 PM
A Photon of Mass ߃-- Physics Forum 0 02-23-2004 03:02 AM
The Special Theory of Relativity is dead Robert Calvert Physics Forum 162 01-05-2004 07:54 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005 - 2012 Molecular Station | All Rights Reserved
Page generated in 0.19250 seconds with 16 queries