|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Darren New wrote:
> Mueen Nawaz wrote:
>> Darren New wrote:
>>> Nope. Electric charge, yes,
Though quarks are supposed to have fractional charge.
>>> but not mass. Photons will have mass
>>> proportional to their frequency, and frequency isn't apparently
>>> quantified.
>>
>> Define mass.
>
> E=mc^2? Isn't mass measured in electron-volts?
>
> Why? What's your point? (This isn't sarcastic. I don't know enough to
> know why someone who knows more would point out that I didn't define
> mass, or that my naive understanding of it isn't correct.)
>
Also not sure what Mueen means, but the m in E=mc^2 is the m that was
used by einstein. IIRC the current definition would require a division
by sqrt(1-v^2/c^2). The old definition was certainly not quantified for
arbitrary velocities.
> Maybe mass is quantified at the quantum level, since mass seems to be
> related to gravity (as in, inertial mass seems to always equal
> gravitational mass) and gravity hasn't found a quantum theory yet, sure.
I have still not heard if the experiment to do gravitational experiments
with anti-hydrogen (anti-proton with positron) did succeed, but I left
the field some time ago.
> But frequency isn't "and everything is an integer multiple of that
> amount" kind of thing, as far as I know, right?
>
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |