Is this relativistic mass? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InDoes relativistic mass exhibit gravitiational effects?Would an object lose physical mass if it accelerated to a relativistic speed (would an object burn it's own mass)?If rest mass does not change with $v$ then why is infinite energy required to accelerate an object to the speed of light?Will objects heat up and become hidden at relativistic speed?Can relativistic mass be treated as rest mass?Questions on MassProper mass and space-time wrap questionGravitational Field of a Photon compared to that of Massive MatterDoes the mass of object really increase?Are relativistic momentum and relativistic mass conserved in special relativity?
"What time...?" or "At what time...?" - what is more grammatically correct?
What is a mixture ratio of propellant?
Idiomatic way to prevent slicing?
Extreme, unacceptable situation and I can't attend work tomorrow morning
Inflated grade on resume at previous job, might former employer tell new employer?
Can't find the latex code for the ⍎ (down tack jot) symbol
Is three citations per paragraph excessive for undergraduate research paper?
Landlord wants to switch my lease to a "Land contract" to "get back at the city"
The difference between dialogue marks
Is flight data recorder erased after every flight?
I see my dog run
How to create dashed lines/arrows in Illustrator
Should I write numbers in words or as numerals when there are multiple next to each other?
aging parents with no investments
Carnot-Caratheodory metric
"Riffle" two strings
How long do I have to send payment?
Access elements in std::string where positon of string is greater than its size
Monty Hall variation
Why could you hear an Amstrad CPC working?
Evaluating number of iteration with a certain map with While
"To split hairs" vs "To be pedantic"
What is the meaning of Triage in Cybersec world?
Is there a name of the flying bionic bird?
Is this relativistic mass?
The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InDoes relativistic mass exhibit gravitiational effects?Would an object lose physical mass if it accelerated to a relativistic speed (would an object burn it's own mass)?If rest mass does not change with $v$ then why is infinite energy required to accelerate an object to the speed of light?Will objects heat up and become hidden at relativistic speed?Can relativistic mass be treated as rest mass?Questions on MassProper mass and space-time wrap questionGravitational Field of a Photon compared to that of Massive MatterDoes the mass of object really increase?Are relativistic momentum and relativistic mass conserved in special relativity?
$begingroup$
I have seen in a lot of places in here clearly stating that relativistic mass is outdated, that we can make do just fine with the concept of invariant mass,etc. But I've also seen people saying that a hotter object is heavier than a colder object. Where they say that the internal energy of the constituent atoms contribute to the mass of the object. This confuses me. Doesn't relativistic mass imply that I should observe your mass to increase as your velocity increases? Doesn't an increase in internal energy mean an increase in the constituent atom's velocity?
special-relativity mass inertial-frames mass-energy
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have seen in a lot of places in here clearly stating that relativistic mass is outdated, that we can make do just fine with the concept of invariant mass,etc. But I've also seen people saying that a hotter object is heavier than a colder object. Where they say that the internal energy of the constituent atoms contribute to the mass of the object. This confuses me. Doesn't relativistic mass imply that I should observe your mass to increase as your velocity increases? Doesn't an increase in internal energy mean an increase in the constituent atom's velocity?
special-relativity mass inertial-frames mass-energy
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have seen in a lot of places in here clearly stating that relativistic mass is outdated, that we can make do just fine with the concept of invariant mass,etc. But I've also seen people saying that a hotter object is heavier than a colder object. Where they say that the internal energy of the constituent atoms contribute to the mass of the object. This confuses me. Doesn't relativistic mass imply that I should observe your mass to increase as your velocity increases? Doesn't an increase in internal energy mean an increase in the constituent atom's velocity?
special-relativity mass inertial-frames mass-energy
$endgroup$
I have seen in a lot of places in here clearly stating that relativistic mass is outdated, that we can make do just fine with the concept of invariant mass,etc. But I've also seen people saying that a hotter object is heavier than a colder object. Where they say that the internal energy of the constituent atoms contribute to the mass of the object. This confuses me. Doesn't relativistic mass imply that I should observe your mass to increase as your velocity increases? Doesn't an increase in internal energy mean an increase in the constituent atom's velocity?
special-relativity mass inertial-frames mass-energy
special-relativity mass inertial-frames mass-energy
edited 21 hours ago
Qmechanic♦
107k121991239
107k121991239
asked yesterday
Achilles' AdvisorAchilles' Advisor
608
608
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
But I've also seen people saying that a hotter object is heavier than a colder object. Where they say that the internal energy of the constituent atoms contribute to the mass of the object.
Yes, and this is not in contradiction with the convention of invariant mass. Mass is defined by the identity $m^2=E^2-p^2$ (in units where $c=1$), which implies that it isn't additive. So say I have two electrons, each with mass $m$. If one is moving to the right at $0.9c$, and the other is moving to the left at $-0.9c$, then the mass of the whole system is greater than $2m$. However, each electron individually still has mass $m$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Okay thanks and does relaivistic mass add linearly?
$endgroup$
– Achilles' Advisor
7 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Doesn't relativistic mass imply that I should observe your mass to increase as your velocity increases?
Outdated does not mean wrong. It means confusing, since we have much better tools to study the microcosm of atoms, since it was realized that special relativity in the motion of particles is completely and cleanly described by defining the relativistic four vectors, which obey vector equations.
Here is the energy momentum four vector :
and to the right the definition of the invariant mass:
The length of this 4-vector is the rest energy of the particle. The invariance is associated with the fact that the rest mass is the same in any inertial frame of reference.
As with the everyday length of vectors, lengths are not addivive, one has to use vector addition, in the special relativity case as defined on the right.
Doesn't an increase in internal energy mean an increase in the constituent atom's velocity?
Note what you said:
Doesn't relativistic mass imply that I should observe your mass to increase as your velocity increases?
bold mine.
When you hold a solid, is the solid moving with respect to your observation? The statement holds mathematically for each individual electron and atom with respect to the other, but statistically there is no motion that an external observer can measure.
The four vector formalism simplifies this. The addition of all the four vectors in a solid will give the total four vector whose length is the mass you can measure in the laboratory. Hotter items have higher momenta and the total addition of four vectors will give higher invariant mass for a hot object than it has when cold.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "151"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f471382%2fis-this-relativistic-mass%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
But I've also seen people saying that a hotter object is heavier than a colder object. Where they say that the internal energy of the constituent atoms contribute to the mass of the object.
Yes, and this is not in contradiction with the convention of invariant mass. Mass is defined by the identity $m^2=E^2-p^2$ (in units where $c=1$), which implies that it isn't additive. So say I have two electrons, each with mass $m$. If one is moving to the right at $0.9c$, and the other is moving to the left at $-0.9c$, then the mass of the whole system is greater than $2m$. However, each electron individually still has mass $m$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Okay thanks and does relaivistic mass add linearly?
$endgroup$
– Achilles' Advisor
7 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
But I've also seen people saying that a hotter object is heavier than a colder object. Where they say that the internal energy of the constituent atoms contribute to the mass of the object.
Yes, and this is not in contradiction with the convention of invariant mass. Mass is defined by the identity $m^2=E^2-p^2$ (in units where $c=1$), which implies that it isn't additive. So say I have two electrons, each with mass $m$. If one is moving to the right at $0.9c$, and the other is moving to the left at $-0.9c$, then the mass of the whole system is greater than $2m$. However, each electron individually still has mass $m$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Okay thanks and does relaivistic mass add linearly?
$endgroup$
– Achilles' Advisor
7 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
But I've also seen people saying that a hotter object is heavier than a colder object. Where they say that the internal energy of the constituent atoms contribute to the mass of the object.
Yes, and this is not in contradiction with the convention of invariant mass. Mass is defined by the identity $m^2=E^2-p^2$ (in units where $c=1$), which implies that it isn't additive. So say I have two electrons, each with mass $m$. If one is moving to the right at $0.9c$, and the other is moving to the left at $-0.9c$, then the mass of the whole system is greater than $2m$. However, each electron individually still has mass $m$.
$endgroup$
But I've also seen people saying that a hotter object is heavier than a colder object. Where they say that the internal energy of the constituent atoms contribute to the mass of the object.
Yes, and this is not in contradiction with the convention of invariant mass. Mass is defined by the identity $m^2=E^2-p^2$ (in units where $c=1$), which implies that it isn't additive. So say I have two electrons, each with mass $m$. If one is moving to the right at $0.9c$, and the other is moving to the left at $-0.9c$, then the mass of the whole system is greater than $2m$. However, each electron individually still has mass $m$.
answered yesterday
Ben CrowellBen Crowell
54k6165313
54k6165313
$begingroup$
Okay thanks and does relaivistic mass add linearly?
$endgroup$
– Achilles' Advisor
7 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Okay thanks and does relaivistic mass add linearly?
$endgroup$
– Achilles' Advisor
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Okay thanks and does relaivistic mass add linearly?
$endgroup$
– Achilles' Advisor
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Okay thanks and does relaivistic mass add linearly?
$endgroup$
– Achilles' Advisor
7 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Doesn't relativistic mass imply that I should observe your mass to increase as your velocity increases?
Outdated does not mean wrong. It means confusing, since we have much better tools to study the microcosm of atoms, since it was realized that special relativity in the motion of particles is completely and cleanly described by defining the relativistic four vectors, which obey vector equations.
Here is the energy momentum four vector :
and to the right the definition of the invariant mass:
The length of this 4-vector is the rest energy of the particle. The invariance is associated with the fact that the rest mass is the same in any inertial frame of reference.
As with the everyday length of vectors, lengths are not addivive, one has to use vector addition, in the special relativity case as defined on the right.
Doesn't an increase in internal energy mean an increase in the constituent atom's velocity?
Note what you said:
Doesn't relativistic mass imply that I should observe your mass to increase as your velocity increases?
bold mine.
When you hold a solid, is the solid moving with respect to your observation? The statement holds mathematically for each individual electron and atom with respect to the other, but statistically there is no motion that an external observer can measure.
The four vector formalism simplifies this. The addition of all the four vectors in a solid will give the total four vector whose length is the mass you can measure in the laboratory. Hotter items have higher momenta and the total addition of four vectors will give higher invariant mass for a hot object than it has when cold.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Doesn't relativistic mass imply that I should observe your mass to increase as your velocity increases?
Outdated does not mean wrong. It means confusing, since we have much better tools to study the microcosm of atoms, since it was realized that special relativity in the motion of particles is completely and cleanly described by defining the relativistic four vectors, which obey vector equations.
Here is the energy momentum four vector :
and to the right the definition of the invariant mass:
The length of this 4-vector is the rest energy of the particle. The invariance is associated with the fact that the rest mass is the same in any inertial frame of reference.
As with the everyday length of vectors, lengths are not addivive, one has to use vector addition, in the special relativity case as defined on the right.
Doesn't an increase in internal energy mean an increase in the constituent atom's velocity?
Note what you said:
Doesn't relativistic mass imply that I should observe your mass to increase as your velocity increases?
bold mine.
When you hold a solid, is the solid moving with respect to your observation? The statement holds mathematically for each individual electron and atom with respect to the other, but statistically there is no motion that an external observer can measure.
The four vector formalism simplifies this. The addition of all the four vectors in a solid will give the total four vector whose length is the mass you can measure in the laboratory. Hotter items have higher momenta and the total addition of four vectors will give higher invariant mass for a hot object than it has when cold.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Doesn't relativistic mass imply that I should observe your mass to increase as your velocity increases?
Outdated does not mean wrong. It means confusing, since we have much better tools to study the microcosm of atoms, since it was realized that special relativity in the motion of particles is completely and cleanly described by defining the relativistic four vectors, which obey vector equations.
Here is the energy momentum four vector :
and to the right the definition of the invariant mass:
The length of this 4-vector is the rest energy of the particle. The invariance is associated with the fact that the rest mass is the same in any inertial frame of reference.
As with the everyday length of vectors, lengths are not addivive, one has to use vector addition, in the special relativity case as defined on the right.
Doesn't an increase in internal energy mean an increase in the constituent atom's velocity?
Note what you said:
Doesn't relativistic mass imply that I should observe your mass to increase as your velocity increases?
bold mine.
When you hold a solid, is the solid moving with respect to your observation? The statement holds mathematically for each individual electron and atom with respect to the other, but statistically there is no motion that an external observer can measure.
The four vector formalism simplifies this. The addition of all the four vectors in a solid will give the total four vector whose length is the mass you can measure in the laboratory. Hotter items have higher momenta and the total addition of four vectors will give higher invariant mass for a hot object than it has when cold.
$endgroup$
Doesn't relativistic mass imply that I should observe your mass to increase as your velocity increases?
Outdated does not mean wrong. It means confusing, since we have much better tools to study the microcosm of atoms, since it was realized that special relativity in the motion of particles is completely and cleanly described by defining the relativistic four vectors, which obey vector equations.
Here is the energy momentum four vector :
and to the right the definition of the invariant mass:
The length of this 4-vector is the rest energy of the particle. The invariance is associated with the fact that the rest mass is the same in any inertial frame of reference.
As with the everyday length of vectors, lengths are not addivive, one has to use vector addition, in the special relativity case as defined on the right.
Doesn't an increase in internal energy mean an increase in the constituent atom's velocity?
Note what you said:
Doesn't relativistic mass imply that I should observe your mass to increase as your velocity increases?
bold mine.
When you hold a solid, is the solid moving with respect to your observation? The statement holds mathematically for each individual electron and atom with respect to the other, but statistically there is no motion that an external observer can measure.
The four vector formalism simplifies this. The addition of all the four vectors in a solid will give the total four vector whose length is the mass you can measure in the laboratory. Hotter items have higher momenta and the total addition of four vectors will give higher invariant mass for a hot object than it has when cold.
answered 20 hours ago
anna vanna v
161k8153454
161k8153454
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f471382%2fis-this-relativistic-mass%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown