The phenomena that we are discussing here is important. Jed, I read that same book and it makes a great deal of sense to me as well. One paragraph stated that a hot pan has more mass than a cold one due to the heat energy content. Kinetic energy of protons and electrons can be thought of as increases to the mass of the particle. I once saw a neat derivation where the relativistic mass as a function of velocity for a particle was shown to lead to the expression for kinetic energy that we are familiar with. That is: Energy = 1/2 mass * Velocity Squared.
Robin, you bring up the issue of system boundary choice being important. This is always the case and a valuable method for understanding some reactions. Dave -----Original Message----- From: mixent <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Wed, Sep 5, 2012 6:28 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:All energy releases cause a mass deficit In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Wed, 5 Sep 2012 14:26:17 -0400: Hi, >Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> We know of one exception to the conservation of energy, which involves the >> interchangeability of mass and energy. So the ultimate principle is >> conservation of mass/energy. However, mass conversion is very much out of >> the ordinary, and is highly unlikely in a "magnet motor." >> > >I believe that is incorrect. According to the physics textbooks I have >read, all sources of energy, and all forms of energy, always reduce mass. >All endothermic reactions increase mass. > >I recall this is essential to general relativity. At least, to the parts >that everyone agrees on. > >According to Philip Morrison the mass deficit has never been confirmed in >reactions on earth. Either the change in mass is far too small to measure >(for example, with a combustion or nuclear power reactor), or the energy >release is too large and too fast (for example, with a megaton nuclear >bomb). > >- Jed ...while true, if the source of energy is external to the experiment, then the mass loss will be too. E.g. tapping into the energy of the van Allen belts will lead to a loss of relativistic mass of the protons in the belt, which we wouldn't detect here on Earth (or at most through a dimming of the aurorae). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
