0 registered members (),
1,397
guests, and 7
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: The true meaning
[Re: AlbertoT]
#447582
12/20/14 18:18
12/20/14 18:18
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,210 Bavaria, Germany
Kartoffel
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,210
Bavaria, Germany
|
heat does not transport mass but heat can create mass If a body absorbes heat then its mass increases Does it mean that heat can create matter ? If not How do you explain the claim " mass is measure of the amount of matter of a body "
Is such claim maybe false ? ( nope it is true ) Heat cannot create mass. If anything, it can be transformed into mass (if you mean this) but how should that be possible? If an object absorbs heat it's simply heating up by taking the heat from something else which can for example cause a change in volume, but that doesn't mean that the mass changes. Also, afaik mass is a property of matter, although I don't know if it's proportional to matter (if you double the matter the mass doubles aswell)
POTATO-MAN saves the day! - Random
|
|
|
Re: The true meaning
[Re: AlbertoT]
#447589
12/20/14 22:11
12/20/14 22:11
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,210 Bavaria, Germany
Kartoffel
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,210
Bavaria, Germany
|
I don't see the connection between thermal vibration of molecules and an increment in mass.
Edit: and I dont't see how the kinectic energy of molecules should change the mass of an object.
sorry but I just don't get what you're trying to say.
Last edited by Kartoffel; 12/20/14 22:14.
POTATO-MAN saves the day! - Random
|
|
|
Re: The true meaning
[Re: AlbertoT]
#447597
12/21/14 10:51
12/21/14 10:51
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,210 Bavaria, Germany
Kartoffel
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,210
Bavaria, Germany
|
no. It says that mass and energy are equal but they're not the same.
For example, if an object has the mass m and the temperature T.
The energy of both together would be: E(T) (thermal energy) + E(m) (mass expressed as energy, which theoretically is true because of E = m * c²)
Heating up this object would cause an increase in thermal energy E(T) and thus the total amount of energy increases aswell. But it's not gonna change anything at it's mass.
Although I'm pretty sure that this statement is wrong: you could see mass as a different type of energy, like kinetic, thermal, electrostatic, etc. Just because the amount of one of these energies increases doesn't mean that the others increase aswell.
Last edited by Kartoffel; 12/21/14 11:04. Reason: typos everywhere
POTATO-MAN saves the day! - Random
|
|
|
Re: The true meaning
[Re: AlbertoT]
#448150
01/21/15 16:17
01/21/15 16:17
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 434 UK,Terra, SolarSystem, Milky W...
pararealist
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 434
UK,Terra, SolarSystem, Milky W...
|
Apparently Einstein could not finish the formula completely because the other two forces were not incorporated. The Strong and the Weak Forces need to be today incorporated with the Gravity and Electro-Magnetic forces.
A8.3x Commercial, AcknexWrapper and VS 2010 Express ○pararealist now.
|
|
|
Re: The true meaning
[Re: pararealist]
#448162
01/22/15 04:57
01/22/15 04:57
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 886
Random
User
|
User
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 886
|
Temperature isn't a single string or atom, it is a macroscopic phenomenon. If a stand alone string/atom moves into a higher energy state it must absorb photon, in order to reach a lower state it must discharge photon. That process does change the mass of an object. However, the differences are nuances, insignificant small. It would be funny if temperature would make a significant difference in mass and weight. - As soon as you lighten a match, your hand smashes to the ground, because it suddenly became t0o heavy-
Last edited by Random; 01/22/15 05:02.
|
|
|
|