Big Bang day !!

[TykeMerc]

Terrifying stupidity on this planet.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/mai.../scilhc105.xml

[NotAllThere]

Easy. A moving object has more mass from your point of view than if it's stationary relative to you.

But it has to be moving really really fast before the effect is noticeable. And it's just another way of saying that to get that extra 0.0000000001 closer to speed of light takes ever increasing energy for objects that have mass.

[TimberWolf]

Just been off wiki'ng, from same article:

"Because the relativistic mass is just another name for the energy, it has gradually fallen into disuse [1].
........................................
In special relativity, as in Lorentz's ether theory, an object that has a mass cannot travel at the speed of light. As the object approaches the speed of light, the object's energy and momentum increase without bound."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_in_special_relativity

I don't understand. And that's just the words, forget about the formulas.

Basically it means nothing changes with speed. You watch goes at the same rate and all the laws of physics remain the same, including your mass. But everyone else sees something different depending on their speed relative to you.

[TimberWolf]

Easy. A moving object has more mass from your point of view than if it's stationary relative to you.

But it has to be moving really really fast before the effect is noticeable. And it's just another way of saying that to get that extra 0.0000000001 closer to speed of light takes ever increasing energy for objects that have mass.

The modern view uses Momenergy, where rest mass is invariant and the magnitude of the 4 vector (E^2 & the 3 space dimensions of momentum). I think, bit rusty.

[TimberWolf]

From our frame of reference, they'll be some 7500 heavier than their rest mass.

1 / ( SQRT ( 1 - 0.999999991^2 ) )

In the frame of reference of the proton, they'll be exactly as normal. Now, can anyone work out, in the frame of reference of the protons going anticlockwise, how fast with the clockwise ones be approaching, and what their relativistic mass will be?

I think you could add them by relativistic addition: U + V / (1+ UV/c^2), simplifying to 2U/(1+U^2/c^2) when both are equal. These numbers are too small for the calculator in Ubuntu, and I don't recall the 'non-explode calculator' approximations.

[scooterscot]

Basically it means nothing changes with speed.

I no so sure. I did some on Monday for an interview for a job in the public service I'm hoping for positive outcome.

[TimberWolf]

I no so sure. I did some on Monday for an interview for a job in the public service I'm hoping for positive outcome.

That's a young looking Ewan McGregor, who I only recognise from the series "The long way around". Their feat was more watchable, though not as impressive, as the guy who recently cycled around the world on his own though.

[NotAllThere]

I think you could add them by relativistic addition: U + V / (1+ UV/c^2), simplifying to 2U/(1+U^2/c^2) when both are equal. These numbers are too small for the calculator in Ubuntu, and I don't recall the 'non-explode calculator' approximations.

Well, windows calculator seems to handle it ok.

99.99999999999999594999996355% s.o.l which implies the relativistic mass is over 100 million times more than rest. Which gives the relativistic mass of an individual proton of around 1.85 x 10 ^ -19 kg.

But I could have made a mistake.

[daviejones]

But I could have made a mistake.

It's easy to do when doing numbers like this in your head...IMO

[Incognito]

I no so sure. I did some on Monday for an interview for a job in the public service I'm hoping for positive outcome.

ma pleasure in other peoples leisure

Class film.