[General] relativistic mass

[Wolfgang Baer]

Has anyone ever measured the gravitational weight of light in a bottle?
Does a hot hollow ball weigh more than a cold one?

WOlf

Dr. Wolfgang Baer
Research Director
Nascent Systems Inc.
tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
E-mail wolf at NascentInc.com

On 10/8/2015 3:51 PM, Adam K wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> Yes, general relativity. That link references the book I keep quoting 
> in this discussion list, which is all about general relativity. 
> Schrodinger introduces the basic idea and its consequences very lucidly.
>
> The origin of mass was always the sticking point of this theory, and 
> was where Einstein focused his efforts for many decades. He called the 
> representation of mass in the theory an /asylum ignorantiae/.
>
> Adam
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Mark, Martin van der 
> <martin.van.der.mark at philips.com 
> <mailto:martin.van.der.mark at philips.com>> wrote:
>
>     Dear Adam K,
>     Thank you for the quote, and isn't it a puzzling one? "The
>     deflection is due to gravitation AND mass!!" Well that is one mass
>     too many, in my opinion, but i think this should be interpreted as
>     if not just Newtonion gravitation is working but, instead, general
>     relativity (which includes corrections to the former).
>
>     John D, i have not recently responded to your comments, but thank
>     you very much indeed for the useful explanations combined with
>     your great sense of humor! The helicopter one with not finding the
>     hard bits actually made it physically impossible for me to hit the
>     small keys on my phone for a while.
>     Cheers!
>     Very best regards, Martin
>
>     Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone
>
>     Op 8 okt. 2015 om 23:23 heeft "davidmathes8 at yahoo.com
>     <mailto:davidmathes8 at yahoo.com>" <davidmathes8 at yahoo.com
>     <mailto:davidmathes8 at yahoo.com>> het volgende geschreven:
>
>>     Adam
>>
>>     For the light rays near the sun, wouldn't one need  not just E &
>>     M fields. To identify the gravitational component,one would have
>>     to rigorous eliminate effects from the weak and strong forces as
>>     well.
>>
>>     Also, there may be some value in considering Dirac's symmetric
>>     version of the Maxwell equations. In doing so, magnetism should
>>     be considered as a separate force, a fifth force if you will.
>>
>>     David
>>
>>         ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>         *From:* Adam K <afokay at gmail.com <mailto:afokay at gmail.com>>
>>         *To:* Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
>>         <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
>>         <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>>
>>         *Sent:* Thursday, October 8, 2015 12:41 PM
>>         *Subject:* Re: [General] relativistic mass
>>
>>         With the danger of producing the impression that I have only
>>         read one book, Martin I thought you would enjoy this quote:
>>
>>         /The deflection of light rays that pass near the sun is not a
>>         purely gravitational phenomenon, it is due to the fact that
>>         an electromagnetic field possesses energy and momentum, hence
>>         also mass./
>>
>>         From page 1, here:
>>         http://strangebeautiful.com/other-texts/schrodinger-st-struc.pdf
>>
>>         Adam
>>
>>
>>         On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Mark, Martin van der
>>         <martin.van.der.mark at philips.com
>>         <mailto:martin.van.der.mark at philips.com>> wrote:
>>
>>             Dear Andrew,
>>             The paper "light is heavy" is no more, and no less, than
>>             a supposedly didactic and the only consistent explanation
>>             of special relativity and its consequences. Most
>>             important points are that there are some confusions:
>>             1) mass is not matter
>>             2) energy is equivalent, exactly the same as, mass: E=mc^2
>>             3) light is massive, both in the inertial and
>>             gravitational sense, as is obvious from experiment
>>             4) the greatest confusion is about light being massless,
>>             which indeed it would be if it couldn't/didn't move. The
>>             whole point is that light is always moving at the speed
>>             of light, so it is a non-existing limit.
>>
>>             Weighing a box with a molecular gas, or that of a
>>             "photon" gas give the same kind of result: the
>>             gravitational mass of the gas plus the weight of the box.
>>             Light is gravitationally deflected by large masses,
>>             experimentally. Light carries momentum and energy.
>>
>>             There is nothing new in what i say, it is consistent with
>>             Einsteinian relativity an represents the vision of Herman
>>             weyl too, and many others
>>
>>             Best, Martin
>>
>>             Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone
>>
>>             > Op 8 okt. 2015 om 19:52 heeft Andrew Meulenberg
>>             <mules333 at gmail.com <mailto:mules333 at gmail.com>> het
>>             volgende geschreven:
>>             >
>>             > Dear Martin,
>>             >
>>             > In your "Light is Heavy" you state:
>>             >
>>             > "In the case of light, the rest mass is zero, but the
>>             gravitational mass equals the inertial mass, which is
>>             identical to the relativistic mass."
>>             >
>>             > Do you have any reference for my contention that the
>>             relativistic mass of particles is bound EM-radiation?
>>             >
>>             > In the case of electron/positron annihilation, restmass
>>             is converted to relativistic mass & then to radiation.
>>             However, I do not know of any text or paper that
>>             identifies relativistic mass as bound EM-radiation. Your
>>             statement is close to that.
>>             >
>>             > Andrew
>>             > _______________________________________________
>>             > If you no longer wish to receive communication from the
>>             Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
>>             martin.van.der.mark at philips.com
>>             <mailto:martin.van.der.mark at philips.com>
>>             > <a
>>             href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/martin.van.der.mark%40philips.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
>>             > Click here to unsubscribe
>>             > </a>
>>
>>             ________________________________
>>             The information contained in this message may be
>>             confidential and legally protected under applicable law.
>>             The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If
>>             you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby
>>             notified that any use, forwarding, dissemination, or
>>             reproduction of this message is strictly prohibited and
>>             may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient,
>>             please contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy
>>             all copies of the original message.
>>             _______________________________________________
>>             If you no longer wish to receive communication from the
>>             Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
>>             afokay at gmail.com <mailto:afokay at gmail.com>
>>             <a
>>             href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/afokay%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>             Click here to unsubscribe
>>             </a>
>>
>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         If you no longer wish to receive communication from the
>>         Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
>>         davidmathes8 at yahoo.com <mailto:davidmathes8 at yahoo.com>
>>         <a
>>         href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/davidmathes8%40yahoo.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
>>         Click here to unsubscribe
>>         </a>
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of
>>     Light and Particles General Discussion List at
>>     martin.van.der.mark at philips.com
>>     <mailto:martin.van.der.mark at philips.com>
>>     <a
>>     href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/martin.van.der.mark%40philips.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
>>     Click here to unsubscribe
>>     </a>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of
>     Light and Particles General Discussion List at afokay at gmail.com
>     <mailto:afokay at gmail.com>
>     <a
>     href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/afokay%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
>     Click here to unsubscribe
>     </a>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at Wolf at nascentinc.com
> <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
> Click here to unsubscribe
> </a>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20151008/0140060e/attachment.htm>