The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Member Map
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. On the Lighter Side
  3. New Theories
  4. relativistic inertia
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

relativistic inertia

  • 1 Replies
  • 1294 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Yahya (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 458
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 10 times
    • View Profile
relativistic inertia
« on: 28/09/2018 22:49:07 »
If force f acting on an object of mass m causes acceleration a , then in fact the force causes change in motion represented by a , however the same object resist the change in motion by the same force in the opposite direction let's call resistance r:
r α f/a
m=f/a
r α m
if we stop acting on an object with force f there should be constant velocity v , the object still has inertia since inertia depends only on mass m:
r=Cm
C=constant
inertia has mass units or energy units according to relativity.
There should be a relation between kinetic energy and mass-energy of an object .Change in motion or acceleration is in fact change in velocity or change in kinetic energy.
An object with more mass-energy has less tendency to absorb more kinetic energy and needs more force for that purpose
According to relativity the mass of an object increases while it speed up , so I have this thought experiment :
Let's say we have mass m  moving in straight line with constant speed v , let's say we increased its mass some how, the total mass will start to slow down the object with acceleration a to reach another smaller v or perhaps zero m/s. if there is force to decrease the speed of mass m then there should be another force to resist increment in mass m " newton's third law"

it is both directions adding mass will increase acceleration and adding kinetic energy will also increase acceleration this also a proof for mass-energy principle.

Conclusion:
If inertia resistance is proportional to mass m and acceleration " change in motion" is inversely proportional to inertia
then force or change in kinetic energy " adding more kinetic energy" is proportional  to acceleration since force or adding more kinetic energy is in fact increment in mass according to relativity and according to my thought experiment
 in my thought experiment my increment in mass tend to increase acceleration negatively ,i.e slowing it down , then:
resistance is proportional to mass
r α m
Logged
 



Offline Yahya (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 458
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 10 times
    • View Profile
Re: relativistic inertia
« Reply #1 on: 28/09/2018 23:00:29 »
if mass zero"photon"  there should not be any inertia or acceleration and any force is able to move the photon with the maximum speed c in zero seconds.
« Last Edit: 28/09/2018 23:07:22 by Yahya »
Logged
 



  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.067 seconds with 32 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.