Just a sample of the Echomail archive
SCIPHYSI:
[ << oldest | < older | list | newer > | newest >> ]
|  Message 178,589 of 178,646  |
|  Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn to Paul.B.Andersen  |
|  Re: Mass and Energy  |
|  06 Jan 26 03:04:28  |
 XPost: sci.physics.relativity From: PointedEars@web.de Paul.B.Andersen wrote: > Note that m = 3.089167695E-28 kg is the _lost_ mass, > it doesn't exist any more. > So where has it gone? > It is converted to E = mc² ≈ 2.776404839E-11 J of _kinetic energy_. > Kinetic energy is not mass. Thus "convert". /Non sequitur./ >> Second, "E=mc^2" only applies to systems at rest. In general, >> it's "E^2=(mc^2)^2+(pc)^2", where "p" is the system's momentum. >> (That basically says mass is the magnitude of the four-momentum.) > > E = mc² is the energy content, or the energy equivalent of > the mass m. The first wording is simply wrong. E (better: E₀) is the *rest* energy of _an object_ whose mass is m. One can also call that the energy content _of that object_ at relative rest (as Einstein did, but this wording is obsolete), but NOT "of the mass". Mass is a quantity, not a object; a quantity has no content. > Mass is invariant, so this equation is valid for all speeds of the mass. Again, mass is a quantity, NOT an object. It does not make sense to say "speeds of the mass". That makes as much sense as e.g. "mass of the charge". > However, the _total_ energy of a moving mass is: > E = mγc² = mc² + (γ-1)mc² > The first term mc² is the invariant energy content of the mass m, No, the first term is the rest energy equivalent to the mass m. Mass does not have an energy content, _objects_ have. > the second term is the kinetic energy of the mass m. No, it is the kinetic energy of an _object_ with mass m and relative speed v, hidden in γ = γ(v). > Kinetic energy is not mass! And mass is NOT energy or "has energy". You would be well to realize that. >> Third, mass is conserved in nuclear fission. This point is often >> explained incorrectly, even in otherwise solid textbooks like Grif- >> fiths. > > Could it be that you are wrong and the textbook is right? :-D He is wrong, obviously. But you are also wrong in multiple respects: > Before the fission the mass of the U-235 nucleus + 1 neutron > is: m₁ = 3.919748214E-25 kg > > After the fission the mass of the Ba-141 and Kr-92 nuclei + 3 neutrons > is: m₂ = 3.916659047E-25 kg. > > So the mass isn't conserved, Correct. > m = m₁-m₂= 3.089167695E-28 kg has disappeared because it is converted to > kinetic energy which is not mass. Again: NOT the mass is partially converted to kinetic energy, but the rest energy E_0 = m c^2 *equivalent to* the mass m. -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail. --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05 * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2) |
[ << oldest | < older | list | newer > | newest >> ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca