Does Relativistic mass yield real mass?

New users should check this forum first. Say hi.
Post Reply
d3x0r
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2014 9:58 am

Does Relativistic mass yield real mass?

Post by d3x0r » Mon Dec 15, 2014 10:06 am

Just a simple question; but seems the answer wasn't really obvious because the words in the question when reordered mean a different thing... but anyway

http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/04/2 ... r-complex/

"The protons are then made to collide in the heart of the detectors. At this point the protons have a mass that is ~3730 times their rest mass!"

But does that yield a total sum of particles who's total mass is the original sum? Like is matter essentially created? I saw also that most of the results are short lived... or is it that the state of certain conglomerates of quarks is unstable .... and they become other things but still exist? Does the excess 'evaporate' as they lose their speed?
I mean if you just stopped a 99.99% particle it wouldn't still retain it's mass?
Is there an effective limit to mass such that it can't be deflected anymore by the controlling fields?

I really did mean to ask just the first question.... is it real mass?

User avatar
DCWhitworth
LHCPortal Guru
Posts: 599
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 8:13 am
Location: Norwich, UK

Re: Does Relativistic mass yield real mass?

Post by DCWhitworth » Mon Dec 15, 2014 9:08 pm

I'm not an expert but I'm going to have a stab at roughly explaining this.

The important thing to remember to help you understand all that is e=mc^2 When you get down to the quantum level energy and mass become readily interchangeable. That is why, for instance, the mass of sub atomic particles are measured in electron volts, a unit of energy.

Does that yield a total sum of particles who's total mass is the original sum? Not necessarily, it yields a total sum of particles whose *energy* is equal to the original sum.

If you just stopped a 99.99% particle it wouldn't still retain it's mass? No because to 'just stop' such a particle you would have to remove much of its energy.

Is there an effective limit to mass such that it can't be deflected anymore by the controlling fields? The limitation in a collider (if that's what you're talking about) is dependent on the radius of the collider, the power of the magnets, the mass of the particles being affected and the speed they are moving at. If you want to move the particles faster you'll need a bigger ring or more powerful magnets.

Is it real mass? Well that begs the question, 'what is mass?' and at a quantum level it isn't as obvious as you might think. For instance a proton is made up of three quarks. The mass of a quark has been measured and so has the mass of a proton. However the mass of three quarks is about 2% of
the mass of a proton.
DC

The LHC - One ring to rule them all !

Post Reply