So does Virial Theorem says that mass is additive? Probably you have to study physics a little bit more before talking about strange things.
quit pointing fingers monkey..... read what Virial is and how kinetic energy is addressed within and then maybe do some homework
I studied Virial theorem at university, for the first time, in 1982, in the course of Mathematical Analysis II. So? Does it say that mass is not additive? Really I don't understand. [
]
but no, i am not agreeing with you...... as it appears you are one of them monkeys on a board that rather than do the work, you bark at folk about how great you think today's material is, but all you are doing is quoting other folk....
Sorry, but
it's not me who should do the work: since you're stating a new theory, that is that mass is additive, than it's you that should do the work and
show us your New Theory. I've read the paper you linked, where is written that mass is additive? Of course,
in specific cases it is, otherwise what Chemistry is based on? But in general is not.
i was a 15 year old kid working through equations you may still have not even observed (i.e. Virial is like calculus to cosmology.... kind of basic 100 class)...
that was over 25 years ago
Ok, I admit it is very clever for a 15 y.o. boy. And what did you do then? Did you take a degree in physics, mathematics or else? Just to know who I'm talking to. I studied physics for 4 years at univ. but didn't take the degree, but I have never heard of your theory.
energy has mass boy
Only if you give it to (take it from) a stationary body.
so when you address me, you can call me sir............ boy
Certainly, when you will have shown that you really deserve it, not before.
I have a real tough time dealing with ignorance
if you want to learn, then shut up and pull up a chair (ask quality questions as no one is going to put it on your lap)
if not then go lay by your dish
Ok, some posts ago I made this statement:
<<Not only: while a single photon has NO mass, a system of two photons travelling in two different directions DO have mass!>>
and you replied:
"ooops...
i disagree, that is a math error, not reality
to see your 2 examples you can see the contradictions"
I can PROVE my statement:
E
^{2} = (Mc
^{2})
^{2} + (c
P)
^{2}E = energy of the two photons' system = E
_{1} + E
_{2} = 2E
_{1}, with two equal photons, where E
_{1} is a single photon's energy (energy is additive).
M = mass of the two photons' system.
P = momentum of the two photons' system =
P_{1} +
P_{2} where
P_{1} and
P_{2 } are the momenta of the photon 1 and 2, respectively.
A single photon's momentum is, in modulus: 
P_{1} = 
P_{2} = E
_{1}/c.
So, if the two photons are not travelling in the same direction:

P = 
P_{1} +
P_{2} < 2
P1 = 2E
_{1}/c
so
P^{2} = 
P
^{2} < 4E
_{1}^{2}/c
^{2} → 
P^{2} > 4E
_{1}^{2}/c
^{2}(Mc
^{2})
^{2} = E
^{2}  (c
P)
^{2} = (2E
_{1})
^{2}  c
^{2}P^{2} > 4E
_{1}^{2}  c
^{2}4E
_{1}^{2}/c
^{2} = 0
so
(Mc
^{2})
^{2} > 0
that is
M > 0.
Can you prove it's false?
(P.S. Since a single photon's mass m = 0, that also shows that M ≠ m + m, that is, mass is NOT additive).