Re: Tansverse mass

On Dec 29 2007, 4:50 pm, "fritz...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx"
<fritz...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Dec 28, 2:05 pm, xray4abc <lemhen...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Dec 27, 9:40 pm, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <dl...@xxxxxxx>
wrote:

Dear xray4abc:

"xray4abc" <lemhen...@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:5f4657bd-53c3-41f8-9ca9-c642d755d413@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

They say, Newton's second law is not
exactly true, as the acceleration vector of a
particle is not directly proportional to the
applied force.
This is where they introduce the transverse mass
concept.

Relativistic mass.

snip

David A. Smith

 That's what I thought too!
I was just trying to make sure that I
am not missing a key-piece of information.
(Precaution :-))
    I have an idea regarding the apparent
mass increase when accelerating a body.
The idea would apply without using the
electromagnetic mass concept (at least
not directly).
   [  By the way (precaution again), do you know
of any explanation , other than relativistic ones,
for the mass increase "with speed" ? ]

snip

  Best regards, LL

There's another possibility to think about.

Consider this. An electric field could be comprised
of a flux of force carrying emission particles (travelling
at C with respect to their source) and that the force
they can exert on a moving charged body is proportional
to their closure speed with respect to that body.

If the charged "test" body is traveling away from the
source of force carrying particles at the speed of light,
then the force carrying particles will have a closure rate
of zero with respect to the test body.  Under this
condition the electrical accelerating force would be ZERO.
A Zero force operating on a constant mass would have the
same effect as a constant force acting on a infinitely
massive body.

How do you decide which effect you're messing with?

<< It's interesting that there are two different
ways of accelerating a particle. For macroscopic
accelerations by an applied force, the rest mass
of the accelerated object remains constant, and
the relativistic mass increases by an amount
corresponding to the work done by the applied
force. In contrast, for microscopic accelerations
of elementary particles in potential fields the
relativistic mass of the object remains constant
and the rest mass decreases. This implies that no
work has actually been done in this acceleration.
The process simply converts one type of mass-energy
to another. Then the deceleration of the particle is
accomplished by an external force (conductive and
radiative heat dissipation) which acts like a
macroscopic work process, so the rest mass remains
constant and the relativistic mass decreases by an
amount corresponding to the released energy.

The distinction between these two kinds of processes,
one of which conserves rest mass and the other
relativistic mass, seems to be related to the notion
of quantum coherence. When we apply a macroscopic
external force in an ordinary work process, we are
ultimately employing forces which can be represented
by the actions of potential fields, but they are
incoherent fields, in the sense that their quantum
phases are not synchronized with each other. Evidently
the application of a macroscopic force of this kind
involves conventional work, so the relativistic mass
of the accelerated object increases. On the other hand,
when an elementary particle is accelerated in a
coherent potential field, no work is done, so the
relativistic mass remains constant. It is then just
a matter of ordinary macroscopic work interactions
and radiation for the resulting system to reach
thermal equilibrium with its surroundings. >>
http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath534/kmath534.htm

Sue...





Bob Fritzius- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: What happens with gravity if a particle is massive due to momentum
    ... and read about black holes. ... been hung up on relativistic mass as being the 'mass'. ... I've head of OMG particle, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Space and time
    ... >>> BOTH relativistic mass and momentum are based on what a moving particle ... >> cannot tranfer their energy to a particle moving near the speed of light. ... >>> thus I mentioned the explanation that makes use of the relativistic mass ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Scientific Errors
    ... as the velocity of the fluid increases. ... mass (while arguing that an accelerating mass does not cause force). ... A force only increases the speed if the net force is in the same ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Wikipedia on mass
    ... > "bilge has a very poor understanding of what relativistic mass is. ... Suppose at t = 0 the particle is ... weight scale in the +y direction. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • What is the distance to a black hole?
    ... spaceship and test mass floating together in a flat manifold, ... if it was actually accelerating the mass. ... You now know the distance to ... is only equivalent up until the point where the time dilation factor ...
    (sci.physics)
Quantcast