Brent Meeker wrote:
> Have a look at 

I'm still having a little trouble with the argument. Going into page
24, we have operationally defined p, E and m (ie no necessarily equal
to the physical values).

On page 24, Stengar demonstrates the classical relativity

    E^2=p^2c^2 + m^2 c^4

and things like

    p -> mv, for v<<c ( where m is op. defined)

    E -> mc^2 + .5 mv^2 

However, there is nothing stopping m being a nonlinear function of the
real mass of an object (nothing fixes the dimensions of p or E, for

If it could be demonstrated that the operationally defined m _must be_
proportional to the object's real mass, then the argument is clinched,
since all else are arbitrary constants.

This presentation is just a slightly more sophisitcated version of


A/Prof Russell Standish                  Director
High Performance Computing Support Unit, Phone 9385 6967, 8308 3119 (mobile)
UNSW SYDNEY 2052                         Fax   9385 6965, 0425 253119 (")
Australia                                [EMAIL PROTECTED]             
Room 2075, Red Centre          
            International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02

Reply via email to