Mass is an interaction

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by arfa brane, Oct 20, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,832
    If the box has the same inertia after all the mass inside it has been converted (somehow) to photons, what could that possibly imply? Or perhaps this conversion into photons, being hypothetical, is impossible too? Why do you say "it seems likely that it doesn't matter" ? Can you explain why it doesn't matter?
    --https://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath600/kmath600.htm

    Bizzare is a word I would aim at you, James. Or at your ideas about physics. You're pretty useless when it comes to explaining, well, anything.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,832
    But you don't know what the phrase "a form of energy" means, so how can you possibly know what photons are?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,832
    Nobody is running anything, get with the program here numbnuts.

    So how do fermions interact with the Higgs field, and what does an interaction that generates mass really mean, in terms of what energy is or isn't?
    As if you give a shit.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,832
    That's correct, U(1) specifically, is the symmetry of phase rotations, in for example, an electron matter-field.
    The tranformation you cite is one that must be applied to the (lepton) field globally. From Gerardus t'Hooft:
    t'Hooft then explains how this phase change can be envisaged with the 2-slit electron diffraction effect, a shielded magnet and a device known as a half-wave plate ( a simple sheet of material with a certain thickness). His explanation is actually quite a good one, I think. Not that anyone cares . . .
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2019
  8. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,832
    Yeah, you know.
    I, on the other hand, know that you're wrong.

    Let's go with photons not being a form of energy, instead as you insist, they carry energy. Why stop there, why not claim that none of the SM particles are a "form" of energy?

    So then the Higgs boson isn't a form of energy, but it does carry energy, right? What kind of energy?
     
  9. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    arfa brane:

    I'm on the verge of simply closing this thread of yours, for two reasons. First, it looks a lot like you're attempting to continue trolling in the same vein as you were in the "Are photons energy?" thread. Second, it appears that you're finding it difficult to discuss your topic in a civil fashion, without calling your opponents names and so on. I'll give you a chance to see if you can do any better, and we'll see what happens I guess.

    There's nothing impossible or hypothetical about converting massive particles into photons. For example, you could fill the box with positrons and electrons and wait until they annihilate one another, after which you'll have a box full of photons (assuming no absorption by the box walls, whatever they are made of.)

    When I say it doesn't matter (for some purposes), I mean that it looks like the resistance of the box to being accelerated - i.e. its inertia - isn't sensitive to the precise form of the "stuff" inside the box. What is relevant seems to be the total associated energy in the box. There are a few provisos and questions about that, but that's a rough statement that I think we can go on with for now.

    Thanks so much arfa. I always appreciate feedback. And coming from somebody like you - somebody with a track record of failing to listen to explanations - I really take it to heart.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Maybe now would be a good time for you to review our previous discussion about photons and energy. Among other things, I wrote on exactly what "form of energy" means. Apparently, you've either forgotten that, or else you're pretending it never happened. Either way, your claim that I don't know what "form of energy" means is belied by the content I posted in the other thread. I have a far better idea about it than you do, demonstrably.

    This wasn't directed at me, but it does highlight my assessment that you're finding it difficult to carry on a civil conversation. Why is that?

    I'm not about to tutor you on the Higgs interaction here. As for the connection to "what energy is", I don't see any obvious one. Maybe you can explain.

    Good for you! While you're unlikely to convince me, why not explain your understanding for the benefit of your other readers?

    Now you're getting it!

    Well, it has rest mass energy, just like all the other massive particles, for starters. It can also have kinetic energy. What else do you want to know?
     
  10. TheFrogger Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,175
    Anything that exists in space, has mass (density), and pulls other objects in from all sides. Therefore, mass is an interaction: both objects pulling on each other.
     
  11. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Photons exist in space but do not have mass.
     
  12. QuarkHead Remedial Math Student Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,740
    I see now that my years of study and hard work were wasted, when, with a click of your mouse you feel able to give me top marks for my post. Of course, I and your internet source could be equally wrong. But how would you know?

    Please stop.
     
  13. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,832
    How would t'Hooft know what the phase of an electron field is? I guess you at some point, have to accept that some people actually know what they're talking about. Maybe that could work for you.
     
  14. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,832
    Ok, then you should have a ready answer for this question: is the universe a form of energy?
    No tutorials on Yukawa coupling? I want my money back.

    Maybe I can explain how mass generation is obviously connected to energy? Probably not to you, you already know everything, right?
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2019
  15. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,832
    I want to know how it gets generated, actually I already know that, what I want is your explanation of how it's generated. Also explain why it's a boson.
    Why does it decay into couplets? Lastly, why does the Higgs field have a nonzero ground energy, where does it get it from?

    Oh yeah. Please explain why Einstein's published paper is a bizzare idea, recall you said that the inertia of energy (which is just a number, you say) is a bizzare idea. It's an idea that's hung in there though, until now it seems.

    That's five questions, or 1/4 of twenty questions. Have at it.
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2019
  16. QuarkHead Remedial Math Student Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,740
    Does that exclude JamesR and me, leaving only your Google searches?
     
  17. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,832
    When Google provides links to published but freely available papers, Google gets my likes over you or James. I think James is just confused; you, just bored.
     
  18. QuarkHead Remedial Math Student Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,740
    I am perfectly convinced he is not
    You are right about that - I am bored by this thread and by you in particular.

    Bye
     
  19. Confused2 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    609
    Going back to the sealed box. Place 1 kg in the box - the box has the inertia and gravitational field of 1kg. Take out the 1kg and (as James R suggested) place 0.5kg of matter and 0.5kg of antimatter in the box. Before mixing the box has the inertia and gravitational field of 1kg. Allow the matter and anti-matter to mix - the box is now full of photons but still has the same inertia and gravitational field as when it had the 1kg mass inside. Or am I wrong about that?
     
  20. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Space time will have the same curvature from the box of photons as it would for 1 kg. The photons still do not have any rest mass, though. Both mass and energy curve space.
     
  21. Confused2 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    609
    Okay that's good - the other half of the battle is the inertia of the box. We could put something in the box to trap the photons (ideally reversibly) - the trap would gain mass m=e/c^2 where e is the total energy of the photons absorbed. This is heading in the direction of the Higgs field being a trap - the 'mass' of anything trapped by it is the 'mass' of the energy trapped. Any thoughts?
     
  22. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,832
    Why not just make the box a trap? Photons, or any material particles have to reflect off the inner faces. The box has to be impenetrable, to ordinary matter, say.
    So the idea is to trap some "energy in the form of matter", where we can decide to include all the field quanta and just say photons are material particles. We can tell anyone who objects to move to another universe, this is our one.
    Not exactly. The Higgs field is analogous to a viscous fluid. It's relatively easy to drag a small-width object, like a stick, through say water. It's hard for an object with a large cross-section like a flat sheet. That's the rough idea there, of "particles" with a cross-section which interact with a field.

    In the Standard Model, the cross-sections have to be determined experimentally.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2019
  23. Neddy Bate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,548
    OK, from your link...

    He says, energy "in any form whatsoever". He says, energy "in an arbitrary form, such as thermal energy in a pellet, for example)" So the energy is not only photons.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2019
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page