Darren New wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
[snip]

The trouble with this discussion is that it started off with Newtonian 
mechanics, and now you're arguing over the finer wording of some of the 
consequences of special relativity. And while you're technically right 
about the equivalence, you can't really say that a photon has mass 
without being more specific - it can have the mass associated with its 
energy, but must have no *inertial* mass or relativity doesn't work at all.

Warp was trying to clarify his understanding of momentum (which can be a 
tricky concept to separate from energy if you've not learned physics to 
quite a high level) and this isn't likely to help him. :-)

Post a reply to this message