Mike Carrell wrote:
>
> But that does not prove (test) the proposition that the apparent mass
> increase at high velocities is caused by EM effects and not just the
> increase in velocity. The problem is that AFAIK no chemical reaction has
> propelled a mass to the velocities necessary for the mass increase to be
> detected. Thus the statement is true --- no experimental evidence --- but
> because the necessary experiment probably cannot be performed on Earth.
>
> increase at high velocities is caused by EM effects and not just the
> increase in velocity. The problem is that AFAIK no chemical reaction has
> propelled a mass to the velocities necessary for the mass increase to be
> detected. Thus the statement is true --- no experimental evidence --- but
> because the necessary experiment probably cannot be performed on Earth.
>
Right Mike
The relativistic gamma factor for a moving mass (m) is determined by (1/2 mv^2/mc^2) + 1
or 1/[ 1 - (v^2/c^2)] ^1/2
or (0.5 v^2/c^2) + 1 hence a 1.0 kg mass moving at the (1.1e4 meter per second escape
velocity of earth would increase in mass to 0.5 (1.1e4)^2/9e16) + 1 kg = 1.0000000006.722 kg.
Hence, it doesn't matter whether it's a BB or the Space Shuttle.
However,the rule-of-thumb (0.5 v^2/c^2) + 1 falls apart: when v^2 equals c^2:
0.5 + 1 = 1.5 :-)
Frederick
