Why physicists never say: ‘potential mass/energy E=Mc^2’ ?
Why physicists never say: ‘potential mass/energy E=Mc^2’ ?
==================== . .
#
In the early decades after Einstein introduced his SRT, the standard
practice was to make a distinction between rest mass and relativistic
mass, and many teacher who learned from old texts and older
professors have not yet broken that habit.
Among scientists who deal with relativity in practical situations
daily, no such distinction is made. Mass is just mass; the mass
of a particle increases as it is accelerated, and there is no need
to distinguish between the rest mass and the total mass.
Nice avatar, fellow Socratic guy.
#
SRT is Special Relativity Theory, but I agree with billsuss'
premise It seems that some people really don't like to make
themselves clear when asking a question. This question
is a perfect example of that.
#
socratus
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 7:17 am
Joined: 15 Oct 2004 Posts: 82 Location: israel
Why physicists never say: ‘potential mass/energy E=Mc^2’?
#
Comment:
Because they've both potential, both kinetic energy
on their mind at the same moment?
I don't see any problem here...
========== . .
My opinion.
The problem is :
In Classic physics there are ‘ potential’ and ‘ kinetic’ energy.
And „The Law of Conservation and Transformation of Energy/ Mass"
connects them together.
In Quantum physics the ’rest mass/enegy’ looks as a static particle.
As you say: “ Because they've both potential, both kinetic energy
on their mind at the same moment? “
And you say: ‘I don't see any problem here... ‘.
I think that there is problem here.
Because in QT there are ’rest mass/enegy E=Mc^2’ and
active / kinetic energy E=hf. But how „The Law of
Conservation and Transformation of Energy/ Mass"
can unite them together nobody explains.
In other words:
Don,t know how to explain transforms the potenial
mass/enegy E=Mc^2 into the active / kinetic energy E=hf
the physicsts began to use new terminology and new words.
================== . .
