[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 71 KB, 500x408, Figure_29_05_02a.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11541213 No.11541213 [Reply] [Original]

If you move 1 m/s slower than the velocity of light, what is your new mass?
if rest mass is 1

>> No.11541220

1

Relativistic mass is a meme

>> No.11541221

>>11541213
what have you tried

>> No.11541253

>>11541220
Came here to post this.

>> No.11541255

>>11541221
asking your mom out on a date, she said no

>> No.11541256

>>11541220
kill yourself

>> No.11541257

>>11541213
wtf is that shit
Does that mean that from a photon perspective, things around are infinitely massive?

>> No.11541262

(((>>11541256)))

>> No.11541283
File: 190 KB, 1029x812, xd234.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11541283

>>11541221
at 1st i wanted to know what happens if v = c
looks like we cannot divide by 0, so i just wanted to know what happens if v = c-1, then it looks like if we divide by 0 we get infinite

>> No.11541296

>>11541283
so since velocity of light = velocity of light, according to this formula light has infinite mass

>> No.11541302

>>11541296
Stop trying to understand relativity, anon. You never will because relativity is a self-contradicting meme. Only retards "understand" it and they only understand it because they overlook its obvious flaws, paradoxes, and inconsistencies.

>> No.11541312

>>11541213
How can this make any sense what so ever considering speed is relative to the object traveling..? If i stand still, and a object which is traveling at c-1 m/s, is my mass higher or the object traveling? In a reference-free zone, we cannot determine who is traveling towards the other, so who has the mass?

>> No.11541320

>>11541255
weird she would say anything, she's been dead for a decade

>> No.11541345

>>11541213
if you move at 0.9999... the speed of light, then you move at the speed of light, right?

>> No.11541348

>>11541312
KouBooneteys

>> No.11541362

>>11541345
Kek

>> No.11541418
File: 112 KB, 1122x900, 78145DDE-408E-4319-AD0A-2545BCB695FC.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11541418

>>11541345
Why, yes. That's exactly right my dear anon.

>> No.11541464

>>11541296
no it doesn't because the rest mass of light(m0) is zero, so whatever lorentz factor you come up with and multiply the rest mass of light by - it's still zero.

>> No.11541491

>>11541220
This. Everybody still falling for relativistic mass must neck themselves.

>> No.11541493

>>11541302
>obvious flaws, paradoxes, and inconsistencies.
Name one.

>> No.11541757

>>11541491
so relativity theories are a lie?

>> No.11541762

>>11541302
>they overlook its obvious flaws, paradoxes, and inconsistencies.

It's literally a demonstrable component of the universe.

>> No.11541854

>It is not good to introduce the concept of the mass [math]M = m/\sqrt{1 - v^2/c^2}[/math] of a moving body for which no clear definition can be given. It is better to introduce no other mass concept 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.
—Albert Einstein

>> No.11542443

>>11541757
No. Brainlets claiming relativistic mass is a thing are just idiots.
There is no such thing in relativity.

See for example
>>11541854
Even Einstein knew it back then.

>> No.11543727

>>11541757
A lie? No. Lie requires intent to deceive. People that claim relativity are at least for the most part stupid enough to actually believe the claim.

>> No.11543732
File: 27 KB, 400x400, but thats wrong.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11543732

>>11541493
relativity of simultaneity and associated thought experiments, if you are too much of a brainlet to understand that this produces paradoxes then move along
>>11541762
pic related

>> No.11543747

>>11541213
>im smarter than actual phd holding researchers
No you are not lol. I know next to nothing about physics but I know plenty about losers and you all have not cracked some sprt of code. Youre just not smart enough lmfao

>> No.11543762

>>11543747
???

>> No.11543966
File: 273 KB, 750x500, 1467660206770.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11543966

>>11543732
So you neither know what a paradox is nor what relativity means and your conclusion is
>I don't understand relativity, therefore it is wrong
like all the other schizos here.

>>11543762
He says you're dumb and don't realize that fact.

>> No.11544023

>>11543966
I actually know what both mean. Of course, relativity itself does exist, but Einsteinian relativity does not. If you disagree you are literally retarded.

>> No.11544138
File: 112 KB, 1087x1080, 1506562952192.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11544138

>>11544023
>I know what paradox means but still use it incorrectly
>there is relativity and "Einsteinian" relativity and they're different thing
Anon, my sides hurt, stahp.

>> No.11544786

>>11544138
I find it hard to believe that you are actually laughing this hard if at all

>> No.11546972

Proper mass is invariant

>> No.11547254

>>11541464
actually, wouldn't it be 0 divided by 0 = 1 ?