Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Biology
BiologyBotanyMicrobiologyEntomologyEvolutionPaleontology
Chemistry
General ChemistryAnalytical ChemistryElectrochemistryOrganic Synthesis
Earth Science
GeologyMineralogyOceanographyMeteorologyEarthquakes
Physics
General PhysicsResearchRelativityParticle PhysicsElectromagnetismFusionOpticsAcousticsNew Theories

Natural Science Forum / Physics / Particle Physics / December 2004



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Particle energy

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
richard_h5 - 19 Dec 2004 15:18 GMT
I know that the relationship E = mc^2 is well accepted, and is well
confirmed experimentally by the mass increase of relativistic particles.
However, do we also have experimental evidence to show that all of the
energy contained within a particle contributes to its mass.  I.e. could
there be an element of internal energy within a particle which does not
manifest itself as mass?

RDH
JEMebius - 20 Dec 2004 01:11 GMT
As far as I know, all experimental evidence on the energy/mass ratio
confirms the value c^2 to an accuracy well within measurement errors.

Experiments that would point to a different value with any degree of
reliability would make big world news. Something analogous acutally
exists, namely beta decay processes of many species of atomic nuclei.

The still intact nucleus seems to contain energy that apparently gets
lost upon emission of a electron, i.e. the kinetic energies acquired by
the decay products do not account for the loss of mass during the
process. (loss of mass time c^2, of course). This phenomenon raised
serious doubt about the universal validity of the law of conservation of
energy. It led Wolfgang Pauli to the hypothesis of an unknown kind of
elementary particle, later named "neutrino", which turned out to be correct.

Therefore, if and when one would discover and confirm beyond any doubt
an energy leakage it would be time to hunt for a hitherto unknown kind
of elementary particle, and to revise or perhaps even to abolish the
Standard Model.
For the time being this is an academic remark only.

Johan E. Mebius

>I know that the relationship E = mc^2 is well accepted, and is well
>confirmed experimentally by the mass increase of relativistic particles.
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
>  
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.