 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Physics - Relativity Forum » mass as a "condition of space"... |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Faye Kane... |
 Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 9:24 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
I recently read somewhere (possibly here) that mass is not something
you "drop into" space, rather it's a condition of space, and that
gravity waves are also a "condition of space".
a) is this correct?
b) If so, is it more generally correct to say that mass/energy is a
"condition of spacetime", and specifically that the invariant-mass
component is a condition of space, while the energy component †is a
condition of time?
c) if question b) is in fact meaningless, is there a way to rephrase
the statement "mass is a condition of space" so that it that it
involves time as well as space?
†I forget what you call relativistic mass minus invariant mass
because I'm retarded.
thank you
faye |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| dlzc... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:41 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Dear Faye Kane:
On Oct 29, 12:24Â am, Faye Kane <fayekanegall... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
[quote]I recently read somewhere (possibly here) that
mass is not something you "drop into" space,
rather it's a condition of space, and that
gravity waves are also a "condition of space".
a) is this correct?
[/quote]
How can we test this? Can we remove mass (or its underlying energy),
to see how space is affected? Even black holes leave the effect of
their internal mass. Since it is impossible (as far as we know) to
test this, it is not a scientific question, but a philosophical one.
[quote]b) If so, is it more generally correct to
say that mass/energy is a "condition of
spacetime", and specifically that the
invariant-mass component is a condition of
space, while the energy component †is a
condition of time?
[/quote]
No.
[quote]c) if question b) is in fact meaningless,
is there a way to rephrase the statement
"mass is a condition of space" so that it
that it involves time as well as space?
[/quote]
Sure. Spacetime tells mass/energy how to move, while mass-energy
tells spacetime how to bend. Or vice-versa. In my opinion, spacetime
is the result of net production of entropy (time), and conservation of
momentum (orthogonal space) and multiple bodies (3D orthogonal space).
[quote]† I forget what you call relativistic
mass minus invariant mass because I'm
retarded.
[/quote]
Relativistic mass is "retarded", not you.
David A. Smith |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Faye Kane... |
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:49 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
[quote]I recently read somewhere (possibly here) that
mass is not something you "drop into" space,
rather it's a condition of space, and that
gravity waves are also a "condition of space".
is this correct?
How can we test this? Can we remove mass (or its underlying
energy), to see how space is affected? Even black holes leave
the effect of their internal mass. Since it is impossible (as
far as we know) to test this, it is not a scientific question,
but a philosophical one.
David A. Smith
[/quote]
?
I wasn't proposing a new aether theory that proves Einstein wrong; I
read this somewhere legitimate and I wanted to know more.
Unfortunately, I can't refine a Google search tightly enough to
extract info about just that.
For all I know, it might be wrong.
Even if it is true, it would only be another way of looking at the
same thing. I'm wondering if that way of looking at it is just another
way to describe a "geometrical distortion of space", which is the
conventional way.
Has anyone ever heard that mass is a condition of space? If so,
please provide a link.
Thank you.
-Faith K. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Nick |
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:54 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 17 Apr 2005
Posts: 3181
|
On Nov 4, 10:49 am, Faye Kane <fayekanegall... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
[quote]I recently read somewhere (possibly here) that
mass is not something you "drop into" space,
rather it's a condition of space, and that
gravity waves are also a "condition of space".
is this correct?
How can we test this? Can we remove mass (or its underlying
energy), to see how space is affected? Even black holes leave
the effect of their internal mass. Since it is impossible (as
far as we know) to test this, it is not a scientific question,
but a philosophical one.
David A. Smith
?
I wasn't proposing a new aether theory that proves Einstein wrong; I
read this somewhere legitimate and I wanted to know more.
Unfortunately, I can't refine a Google search tightly enough to
extract info about just that.
For all I know, it might be wrong.
Even if it is true, it would only be another way of looking at the
same thing. I'm wondering if that way of looking at it is just another
way to describe a "geometrical distortion of space", which is the
conventional way.
Has anyone ever heard that mass is a condition of space? If so,
please provide a link.
Thank you.
-Faith K.
[/quote]
Mass is the energy concentrated into a mathematical point particle
therefore it is infinitely dense energy. Mass is C squared infinitely
dense energy concentrated in a single point or point particle.
Mitch Raemsch |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Tue Nov 24, 2009 7:48 pm
|
|