/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #11104524

14KiB, 579x536, 1cc.png

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 06:39:50 2019 No.11104524 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>11104541 >>11104549 >>11104698 >>11104711 >>11104821 >>11104937 >>11105059 >>11105062 >>11105454 >>11105581 >>11107493 >>11107735 >>11108004

How can something exist with no mass?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 06:49:53 No.11104541 Report

Quoted By:

>>11104524
Well that's a good question. Let's see if any mathfags want to step up to bat before I red pill you into a psychotic episode by completely annihilating them at every point of contention.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 06:50:23 No.11104543 Report

Quoted By: >>11104545

Why must something have mass to exist?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 06:53:28 No.11104545 Report

Quoted By: >>11104548 >>11104560 >>11104608 >>11107735

>>11104543
Isn't that contradictory to the definition of existence, how can something exist if there is nothing (no mass)?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 06:56:09 No.11104548 Report

Quoted By: >>11104550 >>11104667 >>11106380

>>11104545
do thoughts exist ? do they have mass ?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 06:56:20 No.11104549 Report

Quoted By:

>>11104524
light

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 06:57:25 No.11104550 Report

Quoted By: >>11104553 >>11104820

>>11104548
it's just chemistry, sure it has mass

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 06:58:56 No.11104553 Report

Quoted By:

>>11104550
does chemistry exist ? does it have mass ?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 07:03:36 No.11104560 Report

Quoted By: >>11104576

>>11104545
Mass isn't the only measurable property

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 07:14:26 No.11104576 Report

Quoted By: >>11104601

>>11104560
What properties can exist without the property of mass? Are not all properties of the material merely the consequences of shape and angular momentum?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 07:34:00 No.11104601 Report

Quoted By: >>11104602

>>11104576
momentum can exist without mass
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy%E2%80%93momentum_relation

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 07:35:03 No.11104602 Report

Quoted By:

>>11104601
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy%E2%80%93momentum_relation#Massless_particles

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 07:38:05 No.11104608 Report

Quoted By: >>11107517

>>11104545
Abstract objects, such as universals, propositions, numbers, possible worlds, exist while having no mass.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Conspiracy Keanu 30102019001819.jpg, 314KiB, 1200x1200

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 07:40:05 No.11104611 Report

Quoted By:

Whatever

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 08:11:37 No.11104643 Report

Quoted By:

https://youtu.be/GEw0ePZUMHA

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Post Malone Flasher 29102019173102.jpg, 213KiB, 1200x1190

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 08:14:04 No.11104650 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 20191030_011528.jpg, 2MiB, 3577x3518

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 08:16:22 No.11104656 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Spiral_Dynamics.jpg, 121KiB, 572x730

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 08:18:12 No.11104658 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 08:21:48 No.11104659 Report

Quoted By:

^pic related to the chart

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 08:39:56 No.11104667 Report

Quoted By:

>>11104548
They "exist" as a consequence of mass, the mass of the brain

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 09:04:10 No.11104698 Report

Quoted By:

>>11104524
Love mass
Simple as

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 09:11:49 No.11104711 Report

Quoted By: >>11104760

>>11104524
how do ideas?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 09:45:42 No.11104760 Report

Quoted By: >>11104784

>>11104711
They don't exist, they're the consequence of mass (brain) that can quantify and abstract other mass.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 10:03:25 No.11104784 Report

Quoted By: >>11104810

>>11104760
Some ideas exist in a divine intellect independent from the material world.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 10:26:47 No.11104810 Report

Quoted By: >>11104933

>>11104784
cringe and bluepilled

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 10:33:43 No.11104820 Report

Quoted By: >>11105427

>>11104550
> sure it has mass

thought experiment: If you suddenlydied and ceased all thought, would your brain get lighter?

The answer is no. It would have the same number of molecules.

If you took the same number of particles in your brain, and put them in a blender, would your thoughts still exist? If so, could you isolate the atoms/mass responsible for it from the blender?

If you took the same exact atoms in your brain in rearranged them, into, oh, a block of mush, would they still have thought?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 10:33:52 No.11104821 Report

Quoted By:

>>11104524
Einstein's meme equation will give you the answer: energy can exist as a particle as long as it can be converted to matter of equal value. The contradiction is that if String Theory is correct than matter cannot exist as a particle without energy.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 11:56:47 No.11104933 Report

Quoted By:

>>11104810
All theories will reach a sense of recursion/"big crunch" and have empirical functionality

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 11:59:01 No.11104937 Report

Quoted By:

>>11104524
Why would something need mass to exist?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 12:20:28 No.11104965 Report

Quoted By:

we must get bill nyes thoughts on this

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 13:03:33 No.11105059 Report

Quoted By: >>11105573

>>11104524
I argue that mass is the exception. Gravity, light, radio waves - everything seems to travel at the speed of light/causalty in the absence of mass. What about mass is so strange?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 13:04:50 No.11105062 Report

Quoted By: >>11105403 >>11105407 >>11105506 >>11106384 >>11107459

>>11104524
Do numbers have mass? No, also numbers prove God.

1: Logical absolutes exist (i.e. mathematical truths existed before man discovered them; they are not arbitrary social constructions).

2: Logical absolutes are conceptual (they do not exist in physical space).

3: Concepts can only exist in a mind.

4: Logical absolutes would exist even if your mind did not.

5: Therefore logical absolutes are transcendent.

6: Since logical absolutes are transcendent and conceptual, they must exist in a transcendent mind.

7: This transcendent mind is God.

8: God must exist.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 15:22:56 No.11105403 Report

Quoted By: >>11107459

>>11105062
Yikes my dude

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 15:25:10 No.11105407 Report

Quoted By: >>11107459

>>11105062
Line 3 contradicts line 1 lmao retard

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 15:28:52 No.11105425 Report

Quoted By: >>11105437 >>11105579 >>11107721

>pseud general
An object does not need mass to exist. Here are some examples
>light
>temperature
>entropy
>pressure
>time
>enthalpy
>thoughts
>emotions
>ideas
>numbers
>mathematical operators
>social constructs
>human government
>culture
>etc etc etc etc

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 15:29:14 No.11105427 Report

Quoted By: >>11105432

>>11104820
chemical bonds affect the weight of molecules

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 15:30:35 No.11105432 Report

Quoted By: >>11105659 >>11107754 >>11107760

>>11105427
And yet chemical bonds themselves do not have mass

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 15:31:44 No.11105437 Report

Quoted By: >>11105445

>>11105425
All consequences of mass.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 15:33:37 No.11105445 Report

Quoted By:

>>11105437
And yet they do not have mass themselves.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 15:35:42 No.11105454 Report

Quoted By:

>>11104524
something something doesn't interact with the Higgs field

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 15:53:41 No.11105506 Report

Quoted By: >>11106389 >>11107459

>>11105062
> No, also numbers prove God.

No.

1: Logical absolutes exist (i.e. mathematical truths existed before man discovered them; they are not arbitrary social constructions).

2: Logical absolutes are conceptual (they do not exist in physical space).

3: Concepts can only exist in a mind.

This is a contradiction, so your logic doesn’t work.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 16:29:45 No.11105573 Report

Quoted By:

>>11105059
Instead of a wave, it's a vortex/ conglomerate of vortexes.
Any confined amount of energy is massive, all kinetic energy. Any unconfined amount of energy is a wave, all potential energy.
Kinetic and potential energy both have the ability to do work, and are measures of angular momentum, which is the fundamental unit of energy in the universe. Light is not a particle in a reference frame of its own, it is a wave in every reference frame. Particles are not waves in some other reference frame, they are particles in every reference frame. They are both actions of the medium, but they aren't the same action.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 16:32:20 No.11105579 Report

Quoted By: >>11105584

>>11105425
This is some amazingly retarded shit, fella.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO LaughingLion.jpg, 675KiB, 1010x1024

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 16:34:04 No.11105581 Report

Quoted By:

>>11104524
Just ask /fit/.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 16:34:58 No.11105584 Report

Quoted By: >>11105603

>>11105579
Why?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 16:43:09 No.11105603 Report

Quoted By: >>11105605

>>11105584
Because the subject of a sentence is not the same thing as an object.
>ideas are objects
Just please reconsider, ok?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 16:44:41 No.11105605 Report

Quoted By:

>>11105603
>confusing "object" as a part of a sentence with "object" as a loose term for anything that exists
lol

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 17:17:00 No.11105659 Report

Quoted By: >>11107662

>>11105432
read a book

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 22:23:43 No.11106380 Report

Quoted By: >>11107460

>>11104548
thoughts are a physical phenomena so, yes, they have mass

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20190623_191807.jpg, 91KiB, 878x878

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 22:25:50 No.11106384 Report

Quoted By:

>>11105062

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Oct 2019 22:29:24 No.11106389 Report

Quoted By:

>>11105506
Okay ladies, your both pretty... and in a swing of truth on both ends... pshh

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 08:44:53 No.11107430 Report

Quoted By:

special relativity vs classical
literally hs physics

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1570247079462.jpg, 143KiB, 492x262

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 09:17:20 No.11107459 Report

Quoted By: >>11107492

>>11105062
>>11105403
>>11105407
>>11105506
this descartes argument: i can fantasize about perfection, I am not perfect, therefore only a perfect being can put this idea of perfection in my mind, therefore this being exists.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 09:18:53 No.11107460 Report

Quoted By:

>>11106380
>thoughts are a physical phenomena
eetard

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 09:49:53 No.11107484 Report

Quoted By: >>11107503

Brainlet here.
Does energy have mass?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 09:56:57 No.11107492 Report

Quoted By:

>>11107459
>Something with the best conceivable capabilities must exist for people to imagine something with the best conceivable capabilities

Honestly one of the stupidest things I’ve heard from “philosophy”.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1497122155989.jpg, 147KiB, 728x1044

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 09:57:07 No.11107493 Report

Quoted By:

>>11104524
E=MC^2

Most particles are a mixture of all three. It has energy, mass and velocity (C).

Some particles are extreme and only exhibit one of the three.

Light only has C but no mass and technically no energy besides what is contained within the C velocity.

You have "pure energy" in the shape of dark energy this has no mass or velocity and is purely E and responsible for the expansion of the universe

And you have "pure matter" in the shape of dark matter this has no energy or velocity and therefor it doesn't interact with its surrounding except through it's M in the form of gravity.

Hope that answers your question. All other particles in the universe are just different combinations of E (energy) M (mass) and C (velocity)

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 10:02:04 No.11107503 Report

Quoted By: >>11107661

>>11107484
Energy is an action of mass. It is angular momentum, which can only be held and transported by a body of mass and through collisions between massive bodies.
>inb4 normalfags flip like a techdeck

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 10:18:42 No.11107516 Report

Quoted By: >>11107546

nothing can exist without mass because natural state of universe is active

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 10:19:29 No.11107517 Report

Quoted By:

>>11104608
Check out Witteginstein, they dont

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 10:50:47 No.11107546 Report

Quoted By: >>11107563

>>11107516
what is the mass of a photon

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 11:08:25 No.11107563 Report

Quoted By: >>11107594 >>11107669

>>11107546
Depends on how high energy it is. Some are incredibly weak and others are deadly gamma rays.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 11:55:58 No.11107594 Report

Quoted By: >>11107732

>>11107563
moron

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 12:58:17 No.11107661 Report

Quoted By:

>>11107503
>energy is action
>energy is angular momentum
>energy is transferred by mass
All of these things are not necessary true

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 13:00:05 No.11107662 Report

Quoted By:

>>11105659
Okay now what?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 13:04:42 No.11107669 Report

Quoted By: >>11107730

>>11107563
You do realize that even gamma rays have no mass? And no, relativistic mass is not mass.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 13:50:35 No.11107721 Report

Quoted By:

>>11105425
>>pressure
Literally the ratio of mass over surface
Bait or mongrel cognition

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 13:54:22 No.11107730 Report

Quoted By: >>11107736 >>11107743

>>11107669
>You do realize that even gamma rays have no mass?

All photons have some amount of mass or they’d vanish.

> And no, relativistic mass is not mass.

Photons are energy/have energy, and energy has mass, so photons have mass.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 13:55:24 No.11107732 Report

Quoted By:

>>11107594
Moron.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 13:57:32 No.11107735 Report

Quoted By: >>11107740

>>11104524
Mass is not necessary for existence. Why would it be?

>>11104545
Mass is not necessary for existence. Photons and gluons are massless.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 13:57:51 No.11107736 Report

Quoted By: >>11107737

>>11107730
retard

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 13:59:50 No.11107737 Report

Quoted By: >>11107755

>>11107736
Retard.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 14:00:52 No.11107740 Report

Quoted By: >>11107750

>>11107735
>Photons and gluons are massless.

If photons were massless, they’d have no energy and thus wouldn’t exist. E=mc2

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 14:05:00 No.11107743 Report

Quoted By: >>11107761

>>11107730
>All photons have some amount of mass or they’d vanish.
If they had mass, they would not travel at c. They travel at c, thus they have no mass. Why would they 'vanish'? And what do you mean by 'vanish'? Do gluons, that are also massless, 'vanish'?

>Photons are energy/have energy, and energy has mass, so photons have mass.
Energy doesn't "have mass". Energy is the capacity of a body to do work. It's a property, not an object. There exists a mass-energy equivalence in that their sum is always constant and they cause stress on spacetime. It would be more correct to say objects with mass have an equivalent energy. The opposite is not true because there exists massless particles with energy. There is nothing that has mass and no energy, it wouldn't even make sense.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 14:11:01 No.11107750 Report

Quoted By: >>11107765 >>11107985

>>11107740
Photons are massless, they do have energy and do exist. Mass is not necessary for an entity to have energy.
Also, the relation you're looking for is:
E^2 = (p*c)^2 + (m0*c^2)^2
Since the equation you used uses relativistic mass instead of rest mass.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 14:12:15 No.11107754 Report

Quoted By:

>>11105432
T. Brainlet

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 14:12:40 No.11107755 Report

Quoted By:

>>11107737
asshole

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 14:14:38 No.11107760 Report

Quoted By:

>>11105432
Chemical bonds are made of electrons, which are massive.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 14:14:45 No.11107761 Report

Quoted By: >>11107798

>>11107743
>If they had mass, they would not travel at c. They travel at c, thus they have no mass.

Travelling at c-velocity is possible with mass because energy has mass and photons have energy.

> Why would they 'vanish'?

A photon without energy is not a photon. It’s nonexistent.

> And what do you mean by 'vanish'? Do gluons, that are also massless, 'vanish'?

Gluons have energy so they have mass.

> Energy doesn't "have mass". Energy is the capacity of a body to do work. It's a property, not an object.

Energy literally contributes to mass, even potential energy in objects at rest. This is basic relativity and why a Kugelblitz is possible in principle.
E=Mc2

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 14:15:47 No.11107765 Report

Quoted By: >>11107798 >>11107809

>>11107750
>Photons are massless

That is simply impossible because they have energy, and energy has mass even when at rest.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 14:37:12 No.11107798 Report

Quoted By: >>11107963

>>11107761
>>11107765
Is this a new meme where you attempt to troll by swapping mass and energy and insisting one is the other?
Are you literally retarded?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 14:44:09 No.11107809 Report

Quoted By: >>11107970

>>11107765
>even when at rest
A photon at rest has no energy and no mass. A photon at c still yas no mass. All of relativity can be developed without relativistic """mass"""'.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:15:06 No.11107963 Report

Quoted By: >>11107982

>>11107798
They’re not the same thing but anything with mass has an equivalent amount of energy and anything with energy has an equivalent amount of mass. This is why things get more massive as they gain kinetic energy.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:16:55 No.11107970 Report

Quoted By: >>11107977 >>11107985

>>11107809
>A photon at rest has no energy and no mass

Particles without energy or mass just don’t exist.

> A photon at c still yas no mass. All of relativity can be developed without relativistic """mass"""'.

Tell me more about how E=mc2 is wrong even though energy DEMONSTRABLY increases the mass of objects.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:18:35 No.11107977 Report

Quoted By: >>11107986

>>11107970
>E=mc2
You are too dumb to know that this equation doesnt even apply to photons. Just stop posting. It is evident you learned relativity from yt videos and skimming wikipedia.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:20:37 No.11107982 Report

Quoted By: >>11107988 >>11107990

>>11107963
Relativistic mass and rest mass arent the same thing you buttwipe. Photons do not have mass.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:21:54 No.11107985 Report

Quoted By: >>11107992

>>11107970
E=mc^2 IS wrong for massless particles, like the photon. The correct expression is in >>11107750

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:21:58 No.11107986 Report

Quoted By: >>11107996

>>11107977
>You are too dumb to know that this equation doesnt even apply to photons

Prove it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:23:00 No.11107988 Report

Quoted By:

>>11107982
Relativistic mass isn’t th

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:24:04 No.11107990 Report

Quoted By:

>>11107982
Relativistic mass is caused by speed, but energy contributes to an object’s mass in other ways. Even potential energy has mass.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:25:14 No.11107992 Report

Quoted By:

>>11107985
>E=mc^2 IS wrong for massless particles, like the photon

Prove it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:27:34 No.11107996 Report

Quoted By: >>11107999 >>11108002

>>11107986
The rest mass of a photon is zero. If you knew even the absolute basics, you would know that the m in E=mc^2 is REST mass. Photons clearly do not have zero energy.
The equation that applies
E^2=(mv^2)^2+(pc)^2

Now shut up you FAGGOT

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:29:20 No.11107999 Report

Quoted By:

>>11107996
(mc^2)^2****

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:31:26 No.11108002 Report

Quoted By: >>11108009

>>11107996
>The rest mass of a photon is zero.

Still has mass, but all of it’s mass is dependent on its energy.

> If you knew even the absolute basics, you would know that the m in E=mc^2 is REST mass.

Energy contributes to the mass of objects even when those objects are at rest.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:32:49 No.11108004 Report

Quoted By: >>11108514

>>11104524
Radio waves don't have mass, yet they carry information

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:34:28 No.11108009 Report

Quoted By: >>11108013

>>11108002
This is your final (You). In it, I strongly suggest you actually pick up a book and learn about SR. It's very interesting, and not TOO hard. But you actually have to read, anon. You cannot pick up tidbits here and there and roleplay as someone who knows what they are talking about. Good luck <3

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:35:44 No.11108013 Report

Quoted By: >>11108016 >>11108033

>>11108009
>N-no I refuse to accept the demonstrable fact that energy contributes to mass

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:36:52 No.11108016 Report

Quoted By: >>11108045

>>11108013
Okay. Find a demonstration. Tip: relativistic mass hasn't been present in textbooks on SR for like 75 years.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:45:05 No.11108033 Report

Quoted By: >>11108049

>>11108013
>It is not good to introduce the concept of [relativistic mass] of a moving body for which no clear definition can be given. It is better to introduce no other mass concept than the ’rest mass’ m. Instead of introducing M it is better to mention the expression for the momentum and energy of a body in motion.
>t. Albert Einstein in letter to Lincoln Barnett, 19 June 1948
lol

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:54:16 No.11108045 Report

Quoted By:

>>11108016
https://www.nature.com/articles/4381096a

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 16:55:18 No.11108049 Report

Quoted By:

>>11108033
Poor Einstein proved himself wrong. Relativistic mass exists.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 21:21:33 No.11108514 Report

Quoted By: >>11108622 >>11108627

>>11108004
but they have momentum. so they logically should really have mass.

the only thing i can think of is something like an electron hole. its defined as the gap between two things with mass. given it effects the system to the same level of accuracy as electrons you could say it exists without mass, but is dependent on the adjacency of mass.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 22:23:13 No.11108622 Report

Quoted By:

>>11108514
No dude, mass is confined angular momentum and waves are unconfined angular momentum. Mass isn'f fundamental at all, it's all angular momentum.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Oct 2019 22:25:22 No.11108627 Report

Quoted By:

>>11108514
>you need mass to have momentum

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches