0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
According to the ever faithfull E=mc2, a massive body increases mass when accelerated. I just wonder if it gravity increases as well?
If a heavy object with rest mass M moves past you with a velocity comparable to the speed of light, you will be attracted gravitationally towards its path as though it had an increased mass. If the relativistic in active gravitational mass is measured by the transverse (and longitudinal) velocities which such a moving mass induces in test particles initially at rest near its path, then we find, with this definition, that Mrel = g(1 + b)M. Therefore, in the ultrarelativistic limit, the active gravitational mass of a moving body, measured in this way, is not gM but is 2gM .
I also believe that charge increases as well, as it being the sole intrinsic mechanism of inertial energy, so charge generates mass - my theory anyhow.
Quote from: Mr. Scientist on 17/11/2009 19:55:37I also believe that charge increases as well, as it being the sole intrinsic mechanism of inertial energy, so charge generates mass - my theory anyhow.Charge is an scalar quantity (i.e. an invariant) and therefore does not depend on speed. If charge did increase with speed then a body's net charge would depend on temperaure. Since it doesn't then charge does not depend on speed.
Lee,Even if it doesn't look like black hole, the red shift would be so dramatic that it might become undetectible. The thing I find intriguing is the possibility of achieving relativistic velocities with normal propulsion methods [ionization etc]. The reason is that at 86 percent the speed of light, the apparent mass gain is either 50 percent or maybe one hundred percent.So a 1G thruster will be reduced, at most, to .5G thruster. For science fiction purposes, that means future earthings COULD get out of town. Especially since their time clock will be slowed by half at 86 percent. I don't know how steep the mass increase curve is, but a 1G thruster might be able to cut that by another 50 percent in a reasonable period of acceleration time.On a robotic scale, it seems to me we could send a probe out at relativistic speeds. And begin to get inter stellar reports back within a few years. Of course, as has been pointed out before, space is not empty, and at some speed or another a high speed vehicle could erode.
A powerful enough linear accelerator will end up pushing a huge amount of mass [relative to what was injected into the accelorator] out the back.
Madidus_Scientia - You wrote: "You'd be creating mass by losing mass. The energy comes from the mass of the nuclear material." Very good, grasshopper! Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, it only changes form. Give me a good enough linear accelerator, a good enough nuclear reactor, and I convert mass in the reactor, to electromagnetic forces in the accelerator, to acceleration and increased mass out the back side of my 'starship'.I doubt I will achieve the velocity/mass of a Cosmic Ray, and shoot it out my back side. But that IS the Gold Standard.
And what does this have to do with nuclear powered particle accelerators?Anyway, my understanding is that they appear in particle/anti-particle pairs, and the energy of the system remains constant, in line with the conservation of energy.
And what does this have to do with nuclear powered particle accelerators?[€/b]Anyway, my understanding is that they appear in particle/anti-particle pairs, and the energy of the system remains constant, in line with the conservation of energy.