Re: particles without mass!

From: Uncle Al (UncleAl0_at_hate.spam.net)
Date: 12/30/04 

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 09:45:18 -0800

Androcles wrote:
>
> "stefjnoskynov" <miamail@fatticazzituoi.it> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1c3e3d57cbf141259896ca@powernews.inwind.it...
> > Studing something about special relativity and some other things about
> > stastical mechanics I encuntered some special particles: photons!
> > They are special because they constitute electromagnetic waves and
> > moreover because they have no mass!
> > First I studied in special relativity the definition and applications
> > of
> > the quadrivector impulse overline{p}=m\gamma\oveline{v}, where
> > overline
> > { } stay for quadrivector and the others stay only like numbers. Now
> > the
> > 4th component of this quadrivector is the energy and if v=0 and m=0
> > then
> > p=E/c. In the last three equation I didn't utilized overline{ }
> > because
> > I'm interested to the module of the respective variables.
> > This expresion (p=E/c) is similar to one another that we encutentered
> > studing electromagnetic waves, infact a body that absorb an
> > electromagnetic wave receive an impulse by magnetic field B_y and an
> > energy by electric field E_z following the relation p/E=B_y/E_z=1/v
> > where v is the wave's velocity.
> > Now I have to study Bose-Einstein and Fermy-Dirac systems and I ask
> > myself: "is it all I need to know about photons?" We had just spoken
> > about an exstrem particular object, a championship runner that
> > moreover
> > HAVE NO MASS!!! It becames only from a function apparently indefined!
> > And how does it come from by a charged body like an electron? I know
> > from special relativity that mass is only a particular type of energy
> > and I know that an electron orbiting around a nucleus (like other
> > charged bodies) emit a photon, so energy but not mass! So mass and
> > radiation are two absolutely opposite expression of energy.
> > All this is beatifull, but I can't understand how I can speak about an
> > object that run at velocity c and HAVE NO MASS, phereaps it is an
> > assumption used to describe wave function, phereaps I haven't to
> > search
> > WHY this assumption but I have to start BY this assumption to study
> > electromagnetic waves in a new way.
> > I would like to have some comments from physicist around the world :).
> > Thanks for your attemption and sorry for my english (am I always
> > understandable?)
>
> Mass is something that has a gravitational field. Photons do not.
> Androcles.

Hey idiot Androcles, 9x10^16 J of photons mass a kilogram. Does a
kilogram gravitate? Drop a hammer on your head. Jackass. 

-- 
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
 (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf