[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: Steve VanDevender <stevev@efn.org>*Subject*: Re: starship-design: FTL and Special Relativity*From*: Ben Franchuk <bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca>*Date*: Tue, 18 Jan 2000 06:16:11 +0000*CC*: starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu*References*: <200001180403.XAA15573@fh105.infi.net> <3883F3B5.A0456521@jetnet.ab.ca> <14467.63275.303643.616615@localhost.efn.org>*Reply-To*: Ben Franchuk <bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca>*Sender*: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu

Steve VanDevender wrote: > Both of these are in direct contradiction to experimental observation; > moving objects _do_ show slower rates of time lapse and mass neither > increases or decreases with velocity. Found in a FAQ. ----------------------Cut----------------------------------------------- There is sometimes confusion surrounding the subject of mass in relativity. This is because there are two separate uses of the term. Sometimes people say "mass" when they mean "relativistic mass", mr but at other times they say "mass" when they mean "invariant mass", m0. These two meanings are not the same. The invariant mass of a particle is independent of its velocity v, whereas relativistic mass increases with velocity and tends to infinity as the velocity approaches the speed of light c. They can be defined as follows. mr = E/c^2 m0 = sqrt(E^2/c^4 - p^2/c^2) Where E is energy, p is momentum and c is the speed of light in vacuum. The velocity dependent relation between the two is. mr = m0 /sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2) ------------------------Cut----------------------------------------------- You must have both time increase and mass decrease proven or the theory is wrong. Energy to increase a object becomes infinity as the mass becomes infinity. Ben. ------------------ "We do not inherit our time on this planet from our parents... We borrow it from our children." "Where a calculator like the ENIAC is equipped with 18,000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vacuum tubes and weigh only 1 1/2 tons." Popular Mechanics, March 1949

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: starship-design: FTL and Special Relativity***From:*Steve VanDevender <stevev@efn.org>

**References**:**Re: starship-design: FTL and Special Relativity***From:*"Kyle R. Mcallister" <stk@sunherald.infi.net>

**Re: starship-design: FTL and Special Relativity***From:*Ben Franchuk <bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca>

**Re: starship-design: FTL and Special Relativity***From:*Steve VanDevender <stevev@efn.org>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: starship-design: FTL and Special Relativity** - Next by Date:
**Re: starship-design: FTL and Special Relativity** - Prev by thread:
**Re: starship-design: FTL and Special Relativity** - Next by thread:
**Re: starship-design: FTL and Special Relativity** - Index(es):