0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
According to the laws of conservation of mass,
mass can neither be created nor destroyed. Big bang states that the universe began with a primeval atom.
According to the laws of conservation of mass, mass can neither be created nor destroyed.
Big bang states that the universe began with a primeval atom.
So, in the beginning, it seems there was no mass, only energy.
The mass started forming only once the universe cooled down, as far as I know. So, if anything, if you want to make a distinction between mass and energy, the energy has come down since then, seeing that some of it was converted into mass.
Where did you find this law?
Quote from: ligharrowWhere did you find this law?For lightarrow this is a rhetorical question since he already knows that this law exists.
Usually when he sees or hears it he merely wants to have a debate about it.
Not at all
and you confirm it doesn't hold: you talked of "energy" conservation law.
Does radiation of photon increase mass of dark matter in space?
Quote from: lightarrowNot at allMy apologies lightarrow. I made an invalid assumption Conservation of mass: Suppose we have two tardyons (i.e. particles for which v < c always) whose proper masses are U and u which go into an interaction and two particles whose proper masses are U’ and u’ come out of it. Let the inertial masses of U, u., U’ and u’ be M, m, M’ and m’. From the law of conservation of energy we haveUc^2/sqrt(1 – U^2/c^2) + uc^2/sqrt(1 – u^2/c^2) = U’c^2/sqrt(1 – U’^2/c^2) + u’c^2/sqrt(1 – u’^2/c^2)Cancel out c^2 to getU/sqrt(1 – U^2/c^2) + u/sqrt(1 – u/c^2) = U’/sqrt(1 – U’^2/c^2) + u’/sqrt(1 – u’^2/c^2)The inertial mass of U, u, U’ and u’ are M, m, M’, m’ are given byM = U/sqrt(1 – U^2/c^2)m = u/sqrt(1 – u/c^2)M’ = U’/sqrt(1 – U’^2/c^2)m’ = u’/sqrt(1 – u’^2/c^2)Upon substitution into the above expression we obtain M + m = M’ + m’This equation expresses the conservation of the masses of the two particles.
The OP talked of "conservation of mass", not "conservation of inertial mass".
Quote from: lightarrowThe OP talked of "conservation of mass", not "conservation of inertial mass".The term "mass" is just an abbreviated term for "iertial mass".
They mean identically the same thing. Whether the OP meant "proper mass" when he used depends on the conext in which theterm is used. Whenever one says "According to the laws of conservation of mass, mass can neither be created nor destroyed." they must be refering to the quantity m in the relationship m = p/v. Not everyone interprets the term "mass" as you do.
What gave you the impression that the op believes that "mass" and "inertial mass" aren't synonyms?