/sci/ - Science & Math

Gravity is more akin to the force of acceleration than increasing mass due to lorent contractions.

In fact, acceleration and gravity are completely inseperable through experimentation.

>>1550572
>increasing mass due to lorentz contractions
ohyou.jpg

>the mass of the astronaut will increase

The mass of an object does not increase, only the momentum. Where the FUCK are you getting your physics from? the 1920's?

GTFO Faggot!

the push to seat sensation you are trying to describe would most likely come from your acceleration to a faster seat. Think of time as a spacial dimension. When you drive through a roundabout you feel like someone is shoving you into the side of your car door because your mass wants to go straight due to inertia, but you're moving in a circular fashion. The same applies to when you accelerate your body wants to continue moving at a constant speed, if you do accelerate then you feel like you're changing direction (in time) because you're going faster.

>>1550593

No, the mass does increase you idiot.

Learn to special relativity etc.

>>1550593
>implying relativity is inaccurate.

>>1550593
relativistic mass = rest mass divided by the relativistic factor (sqrt(1-v^2/c^2))
if your speed was to be the exact speed of light, then that would reduce to the sqrt of 0. at which point your relativistic mass would be infinite. I'm pretty sure nobody's rest mass is infinite. Therefore mass does increase with velocity. fag.

>>1550604

you're moms rest mass is infinite

>>1550595
sorry: acceleration to a faster speed* not seat lmao

>>1550597

No, not it does not. You are talking about some very old outdated physics. "Relativivtic mass" is a concept that hasnt been used for many many decades, becuase it confiuses dumshits like you. Even Einstien hated the idea of "relativistic mass".

In modern SR (special Realitivity), you do not say the mass changes, because it in fact does not. Mass is related to the "amount" of matter.
That is the modern defitnion of mass.

How the fuck would the amount of matter change if things went fast? Would extra atoms just magically appear? And then dissapear when I slow down? How does that matter know how fast I am going? Since everything is relative and all? LMAO.

Whatever resouce you are using is wrong, and will only confuse you if you ever do real physics.

>>1550627
lol he mad because he doesn't understand special relativity.

>>1550636
I not mad
I just trying to help ya little kids out

>>1550627
You forget that when you increase your speed you increase your energy, and energy is mass. Therefore the energy input to increase you to your current speed is turned into mass. And don't try to tell me that this shit isn't true, study muons and pions and then try to disuade me.

Judging by usage in modern text books the consensus is that relativistic mass is an outdated concept which is best avoided.

>>1550642
LMAO, are you serious? you just sound like a tRoll now

If a muon or pion gained mass, they wouldnt be muons or pions anymore. Mass is a property that defines particles.

>>1550642
by your logic, a fast moving electron would trun into a muon and then a tau. You are a fucking idiot!

>>1550652
Funny, every text book I've read in the past 3 years (I like to read a variety) all explain Relativistic Mass in detail.
>>1550666
nice trips^
sorry the muon example was meant for time dilation, I confused myself. Which part about mass-energy equivalence don't you understand?

>>1550666
other properties define particles like spin.
Also, if it gained energy it would give it off in the form of other particles or radiation.

>>1550682
Actual textbooks? How old were they?
Were they just POP science books?

Names?

>>1550688
no not actual textbooks, I just like to describe my jp lovecraft books as textbooks. Troll somewhere else.

>>1550685
There is only one type of mass modern physicists use, The Rest mass. This is just called mass today.

mass is one of the properties that defines a particle. For me to identify a particle, mass is one of the things I can use. If the mass is different that I have differnt particles.

lol guys your all arguing over bullshit,,, theory of relativity is a THEORY ie it hasnt been proven lmao why dont you boys calm down

>>1550693

it's H.P you moron

>>1550703

What about when a proton loses mass when it is fused into an atom due to the strong nuclear force?

Is that a different particle to the one outside the atom?

The standard for Gradute SR is usually Landau and Liftshitz, The Classical Theory of fields.
The book is like 20 years old, and they do not talk about this "relativistic mass" bullshit.

>>1550710

it has a differing wave function so technically yes

>>1550714

A particle at a high velocity has a different wave function though in that it has a higher frequency smaller savelength due to the lorentz contractions.

>>1550571

FYI: In the earlier years of relativity, it was the relativistic mass that was taken to be the "correct" notion of mass, and the invariant mass was referred to as the rest mass. Gradually, as special relativity gave way to general relativity and found application in quantum field theory, it was realized that the invariant mass was the more useful quantity and people stopped referring to the relativistic mass altogether.

>>1550718

u r right but wave functions r just indelible constructs these particals dnt exist is actuallity

>>1550571
FYI: The preference for invariant mass is stressed and justified in the classic relativity textbook "Spacetime Physics" by Taylor and Wheeler who write,

"Ouch! The concept of 'relativistic mass' is subject to misunderstanding. That's why we don't use it. First, it applies the name mass - belonging to the magnitude of a 4-vector - to a very different concept, the time component of a 4-vector. Second, it makes increase of energy of an object with velocity or momentum appear to be connected with some change in internal structure of the object. In reality, the increase of energy with velocity originates not in the object but in the geometric properties of space-time itself."

OP, as the astronaut goes faster, his mass increases FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF AN OUTSIDE OBSERVER. From the perspective of the astronaut, his mass never changes, but the mass of the rest of the universe in front of him and behind him increases. That's why it's called relativity. Who's mass increases is relative to the observer. The observer's mass never increases.

The other convenient thing is length contraction. To an outside observer, something traveling close to the speed of light squishes length-wise. To the astronaut, the space between you and your destination squishes lengthwise. This lets you get places much faster than one might think. For example, at constant 1g acceleration, you can get to the center of the galaxy in 20 years... but you can get all the way to the Andromeda galaxy in just 28 years.

At constant 1g acceleration, you would feel a constant 1g force of gravity. The above calculations assume you turn your ship around half way and deccelerate at 1g so you come to rest at your destination, and have gravity the whole way.

>>1550571
The fact that relativistic mass is virtually never used in contemporary scientific research literature is a strong argument against teaching it to students who will go on to more advanced levels. Invariant mass proves to be more fundamental in Minkowski's geometric approach to special relativity and relativistic mass is of no use at all in general relativity. It is possible to avoid relativistic mass from the outset by talking of energy instead. Judging by usage in modern text books the consensus is that relativistic mass is an outdated concept which is best avoided.

relativity is theory, not fact, other wise it would be called fact of relativity, lol stupid evolutionists

>>1550571
In 1948 Einstein wrote:

"It is not good to introduce the concept of the 'relativistic mass' M of a body for which no clear definition can be given. It is better to introduce no other mass than 'the rest mass' m. Instead of introducing M, it is better to mention the expression for the momentum and energy of a body in motion."

>>1550712
Try not to be so dogmatic. Physicists who build and use particle accelerators use relativistic mass all the time.

...and then they turn the relativistic mass they've added by accelerating particles into rest mass by collisions that create new particles.

>>1550766
>Physicists who build and use particle accelerators use relativistic mass all the time

No, they don't. If you know how to SR correctly, you do not use relativistic mass at all. You go directly from mometum caluclations to rest mass.

>>1550778
It's the fucking same thing

call it whatever the fuck you want, this thread is a just semantics debate.

rest mass does not increase, but relativistic mass(rest mass + kinetic energy, or momentum if you will) does. (semantics)

otherwise particle accelerators would not be able to produce W and Z bosons.

>>1550877
Ahh, it is semantics to physicists.
However to the common man, defining two differnt masses confuses them.

They often literally think going faster creates more particles.

>>1550642
> energy is mass

>>1550877
> relativistic mass =rest mass + kinetic energy, or momentum if you will)"
> adding mass, energy and momentum
> whatthefuckamireading

>>1550642
This thread is filled with retards and engineers. 3 Things to know faggot.

1. Conservation of mass: Matter cannot be created nor destroyed by any means, only changed.
2 Conservation of energy: Energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only changed.
3. When you increase your speed in a vaccum, you have used energy to attain that speed, as such the energy is locked into you and your container as potential energy, it doesnt convert into matter by way of e=mc^2. YOU CANNOT GAIN MASS EVER!

To OP The feeling of being heavier is due to your ships acceleration pulling on you, IE you accelerating just a tad slower than your ship. This phenomenon does not require gravity.

>>1550900
of course it doesn't, that's what I've been saying, the mass increase is just an illusion.

>>1550972
>>1550972
LMAO, 1+2 are the conservation of energy + mass. Mass can actually come from energy and visa versa. Just not the way the OP is doing it.

WTF do you think e=mc^2 means...lol

IE: in a nuclear bomb Mass becomes energy (thermal)

IE: virtual partciles are created strictly from energy

If Captain Kirk is falling and then gets beamed aboard the Enterprise, are you telling me the computer doesn't subtract his quantified kinetic energy when he appears on the transporter pad? SPLAT! Fucking idiots.

>>1550778
No they don't asswipe. I've attended lectures by physicists working at CERN, and they talk about relativistic mass.

>>1550972

>didn't mention conservation of momentum

>>1550900
>>1551002
>>1550972
FUCKING DOPES

In a particle accelerator they take two protons, accelerate them. These particles GAIN INERTIAL MASS. This means they have to turn up the magnets to compensate for more mass. Then you collide these particles moving in opposite directions. The momentum is gone. But that relativistic mass is now rest mass. You have, say, 10 proton masses of particles instead of the 2 you started with.

So rest mass is NOT conserved. Non-mass energy is NOT conserved. It is the only the combination of energy and rest mass that is conserved. The energy was permanently transformed first into relativistic mass by the acceleration, and then into rest mass by the collision.

>rest mass
>relativistic mass

The shit you motherfuckers come up with to avoid admitting you don't know.

"BUT THE MATH CHECKS OUT DURR DURR DURR"

>>1551129
>In a particle accelerator they take two protons

well, they take a LOT more than 2, to ensure head-on collisions and not just glancing blows. But yeah, pretty much what you said. Just remember that this is a reference frame problem. If those protons could talk, they would not report any increase in their personal mass from their own standpoint.


capcha: Thanks finalized

oh so appropriate to this thread

>>1551146
But... the math does check out.

>>1551239
>capcha: Thanks finalized

>oh so appropriate to this thread

>>1551252

Looks like the thread gained mass.