exchemist
Veteran Member
I have an MA degree in chemistry.I'm not sure what your educational background is? Try this as a starter
Mass–energy equivalence - Wikipedia
How about answering the questions I posed. Can you do that?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I have an MA degree in chemistry.I'm not sure what your educational background is? Try this as a starter
Mass–energy equivalence - Wikipedia
Sadly it looks as if the "Optimistic" frubal that I gave you earlier was merited. I have a feeling that he won't answer.I have an MA degree in chemistry.
How about answering the questions I posed. Can you do that?
E = mc² does not work for light.
Consider these two questions:
1) Does a photon have energy?
2) What is the rest mass of a photon?
And then look again at that formula.
No, relativistic mass is a very important concept. The mass of a system does go down when a photon is emitted. The question is "how much"? If you observed a photon and were able to determine its energy then you could you use E = mc^2 to determine how much rest mass the other system lost?Mass and energy are equivalent. It is impossible to measure the rest mass of a photon as they can never be measured in a frame where they are at rest. The mass of a system emitting a photon does decrease by its relativistic mass.
Lol, semantics, call it relativistic mass, a rose by any other name.
MA in Chem, not physics but nice .
Yes, I'm afraid I'm not a real physicist, I just know the physics needed for chemistry: quantum theory, statistical thermodynamics, that sort of thing. But I get by: at least I'm numerate and have some grasp of physical science.Mass and energy are equivalent. It is impossible to measure the rest mass of a photon as they can never be measured in a frame where they are at rest. The mass of a system emitting a photon does decrease by its relativistic mass.
Lol, semantics, call it relativistic mass, a rose by any other name.
MA in Chem, not physics but nice .
Will he get it? Photons are weird. Their "frequency" (that raises another question, how does a single photon have a frequency?) depends on the relative motion between source and receiver. That just shows that classical physics has limits in its ability to explain.
When one only thinks classically they seem quite weird. On a moderate scale the universe appears to be classical. But when one deals with the vey small or the very large one realizes that that is not the case. The universe still follows clear cut laws, they are just not the laws of our not too small not too large world.Careful about describing or not describing light and Einstein''s equation in terms of the contemporary 'classical physics.'
Photons are photons and not weird. The nature of photons are described more accurately in terms of Quantum Mechanics, and do not violate necessarily Einstein's equation.