Re: Testing the SR Concept of Mutual Time Dilation
- From: "Sue..." <suzysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 23:26:48 -0700
On Jul 11, 7:20 pm, bz <bz+...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[...]
http://www.davidparker.com/janine/electron.html
Actually, the electrons in the beam of electrons from an electron gun
can be weighed. Or, to be more precise, the m/e (mass to charge ratio)
can be determined, and has been determined to rather high accuracy by
running the beam through magnetic and electric fields. This can be done
with different amounts of energy on the electron beam.
Once you have m/e, all you need is e and you can compute m.
This was done over 100 years
ago.
See?NoSee
To be even more precise, the calculation makes
some *assumptions*
Yes. ALL Calculations make some assumptions. When you step on the bathroom
scale, you are making many assumptions. So what?
When I step on a bathroom scale,
the assumption that the measured interaction is
with the *entire* planet is rather safe assumption.
because an *entire* moon has 1/6 the pull on
the same bathroom scale.
that the electron would
deflect in some manner similar to a neutral
particle.
No. We do assume that placing a charge on a 1 gm weight will not effect the
mass of the weight 'significantly',
That assumption is necessary to claim a measurement
of gravitaional interaction. You just discredited
the 100 year old experiment for the purpose you
offered it.
but we do NOT assume that electrons are
deflected like neutral particles by magnetic and electric fields.
So we shouln't treat the mass value quite the same
way we treat the inertial or gravitational mass of
a bullet. You are making my argurment. Not
a contrary argument.
A neutral particle beam would not be deflected by an electric field, as far
as I know.
A neutral particle beam would not be deflected by a magnetic field, as far
as I know, [though it might be effected by such a field [spin resonance
frequency for example], under some circumstances, such an effect should NOT
result in deflection of a beam of neutral particles.]
Since you have never measured the weight of a
bottle of electrons
If the figures for the rest mass of the electron are very wrong, [like if
it were a massless particle], many of the calculations done every day would
be wrong. I am not even sure that life, as we know it, could exist.
If you mean the rest-mass in contrast to relativisic-mass
then the term is invariant-mass. No.. "many calculations"
are not done with relativistic mass and hopefully no electrons
that are supporting your life, need to move at a significant
fraction of the speed of light.
If you have secret knowledge of the 'true mass' of the electron, or lack
thereof, please present it.
0.511/c^2 MeV seems an acceptable value
....but will it be 1/6 that value if measured
on the moon ?
and I have never seen Elmer
Fudd make anode connections to Bugs Bunny
we both have reason to question the assumptions.
Assumptions should always be questioned. I question yours.
Ya think Elmer needs to charge the bunny to shoot it?
Maybe he does that by combing the bunny's hair and
that scene always ends up on the cutting room floor. :o)
Do you have any evidence of deflection of neutral particle beams by
magnetic or electric fields?
If I did I would be on your side of the argument because
most neutron experiments attest to the difficulty.
The Einstein-Mach view of induction would
consider a falling bullet a magnet-like or London-like
force so I will offer that as an example.
<< A side-effect of this experiment is its sensitivity
for gravity-like forces at length scales below 10 m.
In light of recent theoretical developments in higher
dimensional field theory [2,3], gauge fields can
mediate forces that are 106 to 1012 times
stronger than gravity at submillimeter distances. >>
[Institut Laue-Langevin in Grenoble, neutrons]
http://www.ill.fr/AR-02/site/areport/fb_76.htm
Sue...
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
- Next by Date: Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
- Previous by thread: Re: Testing the SR Concept of Mutual Time Dilation
- Next by thread: Re: Testing the SR Concept of Mutual Time Dilation
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
