Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception]

2016-03-05 Thread Gene Heskett
On Saturday 05 March 2016 08:11:46 Oscar Benjamin wrote: > On 5 March 2016 at 02:51, Gregory Ewing wrote: > > The masslessness of photons comes from an extrapolation > > > >> that leads to a divide by infinity: strictly speaking it's just > >> undefined. > > > >

Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception]

2016-03-05 Thread Oscar Benjamin
On 5 March 2016 at 02:51, Gregory Ewing wrote: > The masslessness of photons comes from an extrapolation >> >> that leads to a divide by infinity: strictly speaking it's just >> undefined. > > No, it's not. The total energy of a particle is given by > >E**2 ==

Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception]

2016-03-05 Thread Marko Rauhamaa
Chris Angelico : > On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Gregory Ewing > wrote: >> Conservation of energy would be one reason. If you put two particles >> together and got more energy out than went in, where did the extra >> energy come from? > > You

Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception]

2016-03-04 Thread Chris Angelico
On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Gregory Ewing wrote: > Conservation of energy would be one reason. If you > put two particles together and got more energy out than > went in, where did the extra energy come from? You borrowed it from the bank, of course. You have to

Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception]

2016-03-04 Thread Gregory Ewing
Oscar Benjamin wrote: If we want to be precise then it's pointless to even refer to the "rest mass" of something that is never at rest. Which just shows that the term "rest mass" is a bit silly. It came from some confused thinking very early in the development of relativity. The physicists

Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception]

2016-03-04 Thread André Roberge
This discussion about energy and masses of particles has nothing to do with Python, and I am hoping that it will be dropped. That being said, I feel compelled to correct what are completely wrong statements. On Friday, 4 March 2016 13:36:11 UTC-4, Oscar Benjamin wrote: > On 4 March 2016 at

Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception]

2016-03-04 Thread Oscar Benjamin
On 4 March 2016 at 10:38, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > Oscar Benjamin : > >> The mass is carried by the new particles. The new particles may have a >> total *rest mass* which differs from the total rest mass of the >> previous particles. However the total

Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception]

2016-03-04 Thread Dan Sommers
On Fri, 04 Mar 2016 12:38:28 +0200, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > As for the existence of a negative mass, it is interesting to note > that the (rest) mass of an alpha particle is less than the sum of the > (rest) masses of its constituents. About 1% of the mass is "missing."

Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception]

2016-03-04 Thread Marko Rauhamaa
Oscar Benjamin : > The mass is carried by the new particles. The new particles may have a > total *rest mass* which differs from the total rest mass of the > previous particles. However the total mass is the rest mass plus the > mass associated with the "kinetic

Re: [Still off-top] Physics [was Requests author discusses MentalHealthError exception]

2016-03-04 Thread Oscar Benjamin
On 4 March 2016 at 00:04, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 07:20 am, alister wrote: > >> On Thu, 03 Mar 2016 11:03:55 -0700, Ian Kelly wrote: > >>> Antimatter has positive mass. >> >> Are you sure? >> mix 1 atom of hydrogen + 1 of anti hydrogen & you end up with 0