Even more questions about the Cosmos!

[falkor]

1) If light has no mass then why is it affected by gravity?<br /><br />2) What is the difference between light, radiation, electricity and magnetism? It's all made of photons, right?<br /><br />3) Mass can be converted into Energy based on Einstein's famous equation. Mass is made of atoms, but what exactly is energy made of when it's not in the mass form?<br /><br />As always, any help would be much appreciated!

 

[MeteorWayne]

This is fun <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />1) Light is affected, indirectly. It is Space/time that is changed by mass. What used to be a straight line (from our imaginary point of view) is now changed (back to the rubber sheet analogy) when a sheet it flat, a straight line is a straight line.<br /><br />But when the suface is stretched by the bowling ball, a line across the surface looks straight to the line, but to we beings who can see the extra dimension, it goes down into the dent then comes back out and continues on.<br /><br />The net effect is that the angle leaving the dent is not the same as the one going in. Very close, but not not exactly the same; i.e. the light has been "bent".<br /><br />It is not a garvitional affect on the mass of the photon, it is rather the gravitational effect on the shape of space.<br /><br />2) Interesting. Light, electricity, radio, Xrays electricity and magnetism are all parts of the same "force of the universe." The only difference between light, radio, and xrays in space is the frequency of the wave (oh I haven't mentioned wave particle duality?? <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> ) and perversely, therefore the enrgy of the photon.<br /><br />Electricity uses the same force to move electrons (and nuclei missing an electron; holes or ions, the name changes depending on the environment).<br /><br />The movement of those charges created an electromagnetic field, which can be harvested as electrical or magnetic energy.<br />I'm sure that helps <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <br /><br />3) Energy is energy, whether it's radiation or mass.<br />Energy is the Universe, for without any energy, there could be no Universe, for it would be nothing. <br /><br />Wow, that sounds very profound!! <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[mindmute]

I did not read any of the posts from the first to this one, so I apologize if I've repeated someone here.<br />1). the "photon" is traveling through space which can be warped, and therefore altering it's linear course.<br />2). Well, you've just asked a good question here. It requires a much longer answer than the one I'm about to try'n nutshell: Light & radiation? ...are same with varied spectral wave-lengths. Electricity & Magnetism? In a sense there is very little difference. Photons? Depends. Most scientists I know prefer to call all "Electromagnetism" waves. Most of the people who have listened to my insane ramblings, like to think of Photons from a sub-atomic perspective. and wave on the macro-cosmic scale.<br />3). well, there you go. you've got me there.

 

[MeteorWayne]

I'm not trying to stump you, It's just a very interesting question at the crux of the cosmos... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[vandivx]

"3) Mass can be converted into Energy based on Einstein's famous equation. Mass is made of atoms, but what exactly is energy made of when it's not in the mass form? "<br />---<br /><br />this is t&%$#@! (/edit: mama mia, filter kicks in for perfectly normal word, it was supposed to be 't h o r n y') question that you likely won't get full answer for but I can give you some pointers, first off energy is not 'made of something', it is not a stuff itself and it doesn't have independent existence appart from matter - having said that, that is where it gets slippery because today's physics believes space to be empty vaccuum so I should modify that as saying that energy doesn't have independent existence appart from some substance that is the carrier (so to speak) of that energy, in other words energy is always the energy of something<br /><br />when it comes to conversion of energy into mass and vice versa, that is another t&%$#@! (that's filter again for you) matter <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br />we had around here nice long thread maybe a year ago about that, also I don't think that today's science can give full answer on this point as far as understanding goes, scientist sure are able to calculate all kinds of things about atoms as far as energy of it goes but knowing what is mass and what (binding and other) energy for example inside atom is not clear<br /><br />vanDivX <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[alokmohan]

If I say mas and energy are one and the same thing,would you agree?

 

[weeman]

<font color="yellow"> 1) If light has no mass then why is it affected by gravity? </font><br /><br />Was this question of yours inspired by black holes by any chance? <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />Meteorwayne answered your questions very well. I will add to your first question a little. <br /><br />Many people often have misconceptions of black holes. Since they are creatures that can only be explained through mathematical equations and predictions, it makes them very hard to understand. <br /><br />Light is affected by gravity only because of the space around it. When we see gravitational lensing around large galaxy clusters, it is not the light itself that is bent by gravity, but rather the warping of the space that the light is traveling through. <br /><br />In the case of black holes, any photons that venture too close to the black hole, eventually find themselves beyond the event horizon. This is the point of no return for all matter, even light. However, the light is not being "sucked" into the black hole, like many people describe. The light simply cannot escape because the escape velocity of the black hole directly matches the speed of light. So, the photons could theoretically try to travel out of the black holes grasp, but they would have to travel on an infinite path, meaning they never reach outside the event horizon.<br /><br />When I say an infinite path, it means that the photons (to escape the black hole) have to travel against a stream that is equal to their speed. So, the photons might still be moving at the speed of light, but they go nowhere, making no forward progress.<br /><br />If a river flows at 8mph, and a swimmer swims upstream at 8mph, he will stay in one place forever. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><strong><font color="#ff0000">Techies: We do it in the dark. </font></strong></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>"Put your hand on a stove for a minute and it seems like an hour. Sit with that special girl for an hour and it seems like a minute. That's relativity.</strong><strong>" -Albert Einstein </strong></font></p> </div>

 

[falkor]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>It is not a garvitional affect on the mass of the photon, it is rather the gravitational effect on the shape of space.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />Well said! So that means everything is affected indirectly by gravity? I'm still having trouble understanding both warped space and time simultaneously (I only understand the space/sheet bit). How does time get warped by mass?<br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>2) Interesting. Light, electricity, radio, Xrays electricity and magnetism are all parts of the same "force of the universe." The only difference between light, radio, and xrays in space is the frequency of the wave (oh I haven't mentioned wave particle duality?? ) and perversely, therefore the enrgy of the photon. <br /><br />Electricity uses the same force to move electrons (and nuclei missing an electron; holes or ions, the name changes depending on the environment). <br /><br />The movement of those charges created an electromagnetic field, which can be harvested as electrical or magnetic energy. <br />I'm sure that helps<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />The first part sort of makes sense, but I'm still damn confused. I've managed to find out that Light is the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum, ie. all matter gives off electromagnetic radiation (the only frequencies we can see is that of visible light). But then this doesn't explain the difference between Alpha Waves (meant to be some kind of radiation), Earth's magnetic field and Lightning (as examples). Surely it's got to do with more than frequency? The Sun hurts my skin and X-ray go right through it, but magnets attracts metal objects and lightning can kill us; are you sure all this is only down to frequency of photons!?<br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>3) Energy is energy, whether it's radiation or mass. <br />Energy is the Universe, for without any energy, there could be no Universe, for it</p></blockquote>

 

[weeman]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p> I'm still having trouble understanding both warped space and time simultaneously (I only understand the space/sheet bit). How does time get warped by mass? <br /><p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Time slows as you reach the speed of light (C). So, when you actually reach C, time should stop all together. In addition, time also slows with increasing gravity. As a person gets closer and closer to a strong gravity well, time will progressively slow down. <br /><br />Einstein's theory of relativity describes this very well. Lets say there are two astronauts, Jim and Tom, both are 25 years of age. They sit outside a blackhole far from any danger. Jim decides he is going to take a trip into the blackhole while Tom sits outside in the spaceship. In each of their hands, the astronauts hold a large digital clock. When Jim leaves Tom, both clocks agree on the exact same time, however, something odd will happen when Jim ventures to the black hole. <br /><br />As Jim gets closer and closer to the event horizon his speed increases, meaning his clock slows down. Also, Jim has to fire his jetpack at a faster and faster speed to prevent from being sucked into the black hole. So, as Tom watches Jim's clock, he sees it progressively tick slower and slower. However, from Jim's perspective, his clock is still ticking at regular pace. The funny thing is that Jim now sees Tom's clock progrossively increasing in speed. However, Tom sees his clock ticking at normal pace. Both will argue that each others clocks are going out of control. However, both have definite proof to support their own arguments that their clocks are perfectly fine. This seems paradoxical, however it makes perfect sense. <br /><br />Now, if Jim could sit just outside the event horizon for a couple years, then somehow rocket himself back to the ship, he would find that much more time had passed for Tom, and Tom is now an old man, who appears to be much older than him. Jim <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><strong><font color="#ff0000">Techies: We do it in the dark. </font></strong></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>"Put your hand on a stove for a minute and it seems like an hour. Sit with that special girl for an hour and it seems like a minute. That's relativity.</strong><strong>" -Albert Einstein </strong></font></p> </div>

 

[falkor]

That's the best explanation I've ever heard! Bravo... thanks for taking the time to post it. You've expanded on the theory of warped space-time and explained it very well, and I'll just quote two of the assumptions in brief:<br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Time slows as you reach the speed of light (C). So, when you actually reach C, time should stop all together.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>As a person gets closer and closer to a strong gravity well, time will progressively slow down.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />Again, you've explained them very well and I fully understand what you are implying, but it will still take me sometime to think about it properly. My initial problem with this theory is as follows:<br />Time is not a spacial dimension. Along with the 3D co-ordinates of space, any additional attribute could be noted and described as being the fourth dimension, but the real fourth dimension is demonstrated by the 4D cube. What evidence is there to support time as being the fourth dimension? Indeed what evidence is there to support both these statements about time slowing down (a) at higher speeds and (b) near a massive object.

 

[SpeedFreek]

For evidence about time-dilation, see my reply in your post Asking if Einstein could be wrong. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000">_______________________________________________<br /></font><font size="2"><em>SpeedFreek</em></font> </p> </div>

 

[R1]

<font color="yellow">Indeed what evidence is there to support both these statements about time slowing down (a) at higher speeds</font><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> here's a link to a video of a sample experiment:<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdRmCqylsME<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[mindmute]

Alright, I will take a stab at #3.<br />a long long time ago, all energy was all together, then it all split apart. in a sense each "particle" of energy is still a singular dimension, connected to all other energy only through time. Each One dimensional energy "packet" can be affected by higher dimensions, if for example it becomes attached to a 2nd dimensional polarity, it can become part of matter, instead of a singular trajectory, it loops into a tight spiral around another opposite charged particle.<br />when sufficient (i before e except after c my a$$), mutually attracted combinations of energy, (mass) reaches critical mass, a third dimensional property emerges, the nuclear force. and then we have the illusion of gravity where mass warps the fourth dimensional space time. (what did i just say? i have to stop smoking that stuff). <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />~

 

[Anonymous]

1) If light has no mass then why is it affected by gravity? <br /><br />Probably, it is the duel nature of light that is responsible for light's sesitivity to gravity.<br />Light does not have mass, but some of its properties are identical to matter, and matter is sensitive to gravity, so is light.<br /><br />2) What is the difference between light, radiation, electricity and magnetism? It's all made of photons, right? <br /><br />They are all energies, and are inter-related.<br />In this case I go with Meteor Wayne.<br /><br />3) Mass can be converted into Energy based on Einstein's famous equation. Mass is made of atoms, but what exactly is energy made of when it's not in the mass form?<br />--According to the two natures of enrgy and matter,<br />Energy has wave nature, matter has particle nature.<br />This nature depends on velocity and mass of an object that decides whether anything is energy or matter.<br />More particle nature makes it energy, more wave mature makes it matter.<br /><br />TO CONSIDER: (the energy mass relation)<br />The de Broglie equation is the universal relationship between wavelength, λ, (wave nature) and momentum, p, (particle nature). <br /><br />λ = h / p<br />Therefore, Lambda (ie- wavelength) = h/ mv.<br /><br />The constant of proportionality, h, is Planck's constant.<br /><br />The full derivation:<br />http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=31834 <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <strong><font size="2"><p align="center"><br /><img id="a9529085-d63d-481e-9277-832ea5d58917" src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/9/2/a9529085-d63d-481e-9277-832ea5d58917.Large.gif" alt="blog post photo" /><br /><font color="#339966">Oops! this is my alien friend.</font></p><p align="center"><font color="#ff6600">╬→Ť╠╣є ’ M€ ’<br />╬→ Ðôŵņ2Ëãřŧĥ ๑<br />╬→ ЙДm€ :Varsha<br /></font></p></font></strong> </div>

 

[vandivx]

sorry didn't come back to this thread for long time<br /><br />"If I say mas and energy are one and the same thing,would you agree?"<br />---<br />if by mass you mean inertia, not matter, then yes<br /><br />but the question then is what is inertia, it is not some stuff but a kind of activity that matter does<br /><br />I think most people take mass and matter refering to the same thing but matter is the physical stuff that exists and mass is one of the properties that matter has, that is it has inertia<br /><br />vanDivX <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[xmo1]

1> Light is affected by the curvature of space-time which is caused by gravity.<br />2 /> That is fairly straight forward. You can check the dictionary on that.<br />3 /> Are mass and energy the same as water and ice which are two states of the same molecular structure? Not exactly, but similar.<br /><br />"Energy: A measurable physical quantity, with dimensions mass times velocity squared, that is conserved for an isolated system. Energy of motion is kinetic energy; energy of position is potential energy." <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>DenniSys.com</p> </div>