[prowatt!]

I was drinking one night, and got in this convo with a buddy. After some research it appears as though light has no mass. Well it does but not really.



HELP ME learnz!

[prowatt!]

I mean wtf? Gravity affects photons...Gravity can effect something with NO mass?

[carney]

My only guess if photons are anywhere related to electrons then there mass is so tiny its almost negligible

[prowatt!]

Originally Posted by carney My only guess if photons are anywhere related to electrons then there mass is so tiny its almost negligible

Not when you add it all up though right? There is a lot of light in the universe. Quarks, bosons are much smaller than electrons. We think we can measure those.

What about light at rest? It has to have mass, no? I can create thermal energy with light that we can then weigh. Where did that mass come from?

[03Black2v]

Because. Race car

[prowatt!]

Originally Posted by 03Black2v Because. Race car

[BWAL]

one of the mysteries of the universe. einstein's theory of relativity isn't 100% accurate, so what we think to be possible and impossible aren't always such. for example, according to the theory of relativity, the basis of all physics in the universe, black holes aren't even allowed to exist within the laws of physics.

[Cathedral]

It's hard to be baffled by how gravity affects something with no mass when we don't even know what gravity is.

Plus, the creation of photons exists on the quantum level, where shit gets all fucked up anyways and you can't effectively apply the old school theories of relativity.

Photons are considered massless to fit them into the existing models of relativity, but this is merely to help solve larger problems. It's a hypothetical situation. That's why new theories are constantly being hypothesized and experimented. Find the answer to the question, and you would be a rich man.

[carney]

Originally Posted by Cathedral It's hard to be baffled by how gravity affects something with no mass when we don't even know what gravity is. Plus, the creation of photons exists on the quantum level, where shit gets all fucked up anyways and you can't effectively apply the old school theories of relativity. Photons are considered massless to fit them into the existing models of relativity, but this is merely to help solve larger problems. It's a hypothetical situation. That's why new theories are constantly being hypothesized and experimented. Find the answer to the question, and you would be a rich man.

screw quantam chemistry and physics. that is all

[prowatt!]

Originally Posted by BWAL one of the mysteries of the universe. einstein's theory of relativity isn't 100% accurate, so what we think to be possible and impossible aren't always such. for example, according to the theory of relativity, the basis of all physics in the universe, black holes aren't even allowed to exist within the laws of physics.

Where have holes been punch in relativity? I agree that it is most likely not 100% accurate but our observations seem to agree with the theory.

I have always thought that relativity actually predicted black holes? Don't nuetron stars lend a bit of insight to this?

[Cathedral]

Originally Posted by carney screw quantam chemistry and physics. that is all

Aw, looks like someone couldn't tell the difference between Plancks Law and planking.

[carney]

Originally Posted by Cathedral Aw, looks like someone couldn't tell the difference between Plancks Law and planking.

I'll just use heisenberg's uncertainty principle to figure out where i stand on the issue

/science nerd

[prowatt!]

Originally Posted by Cathedral It's hard to be baffled by how gravity affects something with no mass when we don't even know what gravity is. Plus, the creation of photons exists on the quantum level, where shit gets all fucked up anyways and you can't effectively apply the old school theories of relativity. Photons are considered massless to fit them into the existing models of relativity, but this is merely to help solve larger problems. It's a hypothetical situation. That's why new theories are constantly being hypothesized and experimented. Find the answer to the question, and you would be a rich man.

I think it's hard NOT to be baffled. Shouldn't gravity have mass? Is gravity not mass in and of it's self? Inertia created by our "Big Bang" shockwave?

I'm trying not to steer into propping up or working under an existing theory. Rather trying to wrap my mind about our cosmological constant not having any mass. What else has such an effect on my being other than light? I guess it's just tough for me to understand how something you can feel, see and touch has no mass?

[prowatt!]

Originally Posted by carney I'll just use heisenberg's uncertainty principle to figure out where i stand on the issue /science nerd

For me it's more about philosophy than science. Just trying to understand the functions of my enviroment.

[Fox2102]

We've only scratched the surface on physics. They are analyzing data now on a particle that went faster than light.

[Silver35th]

Originally Posted by prowatt! I think it's hard NOT to be baffled. Shouldn't gravity have mass? Is gravity not mass in and of it's self? Inertia created by our "Big Bang" shockwave? I'm trying not to steer into propping up or working under an existing theory. Rather trying to wrap my mind about our cosmological constant not having any mass. What else has such an effect on my being other than light? I guess it's just tough for me to understand how something you can feel, see and touch has no mass?

Gravity is a relation to mass and the radius of a given object. Are you referring to feeling, seeing, and touching light or gravity?

[TheUNZippee!]

IMHO, just because we haven't figured out how to measure something or detect mass in a given object, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. What if it has mass, but it is immeasurable by any methods we've yet devised?

[prowatt!]

Originally Posted by baleger92 Gravity is a relation to mass and the radius of a given object. Are you referring to feeling, seeing, and touching light or gravity?

Light. Is gravity measured by or defined by the criteria you listed? I really have no idea.




Disclaimer:

I am in no way educated or well informed. I'm simply having a flashback

[prowatt!]

Originally Posted by TheUNZippee! IMHO, just because we haven't figured out how to measure something or detect mass in a given object, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. What if it has mass, but it is immeasurable by any methods we've yet devised?

Sure. I have no illusions that we can make the measurment, rather something just tells me that we can not. The problem is when we decide to give light mass...then what? A lot of theories are shot to shit.

The thing that blows my fucking mind is that light is the only thing I know of that not only sets my path in life but keeps me warm and alive, has no mass. Does light not contain the universe? The universe is full of matter all which have mass other than light, lol.

[Silver35th]

+1 to what Zip said.

We can touch light, but we don't know it. It is a particle/wave and it is moving. The VISIBLE light we can see cannot penetrate some things. However, when looking at gamma rays and x rays and so on, they can go right through you. We cannot see these light particles/waves due to it's amplitude and frequency. What you feel from light is its energy as heat. The force of gravity is given by the equation F = [G(m1)(m2)]/[r^2] where G is the gravitational constant and the m's are masses of two objects attracting one another. The radius given by r is essentially the distance between two objects.

I am no expert either, I have only completed Physics II at this point. I just love the subject and learn on my own time also.