Re: Energy and Mass
- From: "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 11 Feb 2007 10:26:14 -0800
On Feb 11, 5:21 pm, "Jon Slaughter" <Jon_Slaugh...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
When one measures mass of an object does it include measuring the energy
that the object contains? (Since mass and energy are "equivilent")
Suppose I have a measure the mass of a box and then I "put" some energy in
it. When I measure it will I get a different mass?
If thats the case then doesn't the bonds in an atom increase its mass more
than by just using the atomic mass?
That is, say we are using carbon as our material and we measure out one mole
then we would say there are avagadro's number of atoms there. But if energy
is equivilent to mass then aren't we overestimating? (because all thsoe
bonds that exist will have energy = mass but do not represent the true mass
of just the atom)
Ofcourse maybe the overall error is insignificant but I'm just wondering if
my logic is correct?
Thanks,
Jon
--------------
energy is not equivalent to mass...
it is equivalent to mass IN MOTION !!!
ATB
Y.Porat
----------------
.
- References:
- Energy and Mass
- From: Jon Slaughter
- Energy and Mass
- Prev by Date: Re: Energy and Mass
- Next by Date: Re: Proposal for a perpetual motion machine
- Previous by thread: Re: Energy and Mass
- Next by thread: Re: Energy and Mass
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
