Peron

So your saying that the mass doesnt rise?

I still don't get it, can someone explain it in laymen's terms?

I am trying to work out a difficult problem. Atoms are smashed in colliders to release energy. Could this be happening in a black hole? I think it is, I think that all of the matter in the black hole will get destroyed, well lets say the mass will be converted into energy. But their is a problem, I do not know what the pressure is inside a black hole and how much energy would be required to destroy the particles inside. The most massive black hole known (binary pair, in OJ 287) is 18 billion solar masses. I think that would be enough to convert the matter into energy. Any help?

"If the object is moving slowly, the relativistic mass is nearly equal to the rest mass and both are nearly equal to the usual Newtonian mass. If the object is moving quickly, the relativistic mass is greater than the rest mass. As the object approaches the speed of light, the relativistic mass becomes infinite, because the momentum becomes infinite. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass%E2%80%93energy_equivalence#Conservation_of_mass_and_energy)" The relativistic mass comes from the energy you put into it. But mass is energy, so when the mass increases the energy also increases in the moving object. There should be no reason why this isn't responsible for the slower decay rate.

"If you push on an object in the direction of motion, it gains momentum and it gains energy. But if the object is already travelling near the speed of light, it can't move much faster, no matter how much energy it absorbs. Its momentum and energy continue to increase, but its speed approaches a constant value—the speed of light. This means that in relativity the momentum of an object cannot be a constant times the velocity, nor is the kinetic energy given by 1⁄2mv2. The relativistic mass is defined as the ratio of the momentum of an object to its velocity, and it depends on the motion of the object. If the object is moving slowly, the relativistic mass is nearly equal to the rest mass and both are nearly equal to the usual Newtonian mass. If the object is moving quickly, the relativistic mass is greater than the rest mass. As the object approaches the speed of light, the relativistic mass becomes infinite, because the momentum becomes infinite." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass%E2%80%93energy_equivalence#Conservation_of_mass_and_energy

Well why doesn't the mass increase? I thought particles traveling close to the speed of light, that have mass, convert the energy that is given to them to mass.

Ok, now I get it their is no "real" mass increase. It's more of a illusion.

Well doesn't the energy also increase in the Muon which is moving?

A stationary Muon decays far quicker than a Muon moving near the speed of light. According to the special theory of relativity time dilates, so the decay rate for the moving muon slows down. Because time slows down. But according to SR something different happens to particles moving close to the speed of light, they gain mass. So could the extra mass account for the slower decay rate of the moving muon?

Let me restate the question, How does the environment slow down? Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedWhats the mechanism that makes time slow down?

But does anyone know why this happens? Why the environment slows down?

But the people inside don't think it slowed down, because the universe is relative? I think I'm starting to get it.

Well, I am having problem understanding things. For instance we measure time as movement of a object. The sun moving, a shadow moving, water droplets falling, etc. If it takes the water droplet 1 second to fall one foot, we say one second has gone by and if a water droplet fell six feet, we would say six seconds had gone by. The water clock is not measuring anything in the universe. The water clock is just interpreted by humans, to know how long it takes a person to run five miles, or how long I have to wait at the bus stop. Now, lets say I take the water clock to the moon, where their is less gravity. The clock will appear to run slower. Time didn't slow down because the water clock wasn't measuring time in the first place. It was just our interpretation of the water droplets falling. Even Einstein's photon clock, where a light beam bounces between two mirrors. The stationary light clock runs faster than the one that is moving. And again the moving clock's light beam just traces out a longer path, until it hits the mirror. So why do we say that time slowed down when it was just the clocks and the environment of the clocks changing.

Length is the measure of how long a object is. So when you say length contraction you mean the object contracts thus the length contracts. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedThe same way a clock doesn't measure the time in the universe, the ruler doesn't measure the length.

You mean the object contracts not the length. Length doesn't exist.

But why does it do that? Why does time dilate?

so a wave is a separate entity to matter?

So here is the question, Light is a EM wave, but a wave is a disturbance, and a disturbance is what something is doing, essentially action. So how can Light be a action? Or am I missing something here?

So what your saying is that their is no "real" time. It isn't a particle or substance? It's just the movement of objects and distance? Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged Yes I understand but why is then that people talk about time travel and time going by slower here on earth than when I'm in a spaceship flying near the speed of light? If time dilation is purely mechanical then why should I not age, and my friend on earth ages. If time passes at the same speed and the clocks are just dilating?

I know about time dilation, for instance if I have two hour glasses. and I place one on a spaceship and leave the other on earth, then I accelerate the spaceship to near light speeds. The hour glass on the spaceship will have far more grains of sand left in the top half of the hour glass, than the hour glass on Earth. What mechanism was responsible for this? How does time effect the grains of sand in the hour glass? And one of the things I'm having trouble understanding is; how does the clock measure time against the universe. If a clock is just small mechanical or electrical parts moving about, why does the clock slow down? What I'm asking is, Is time purely mechanical or is it some kind of substance and the clocks measure this substance like a volt meter measures volts in a current?

There arn't any.

http://www.slipstring.com/ the slipstring drive is a book written by Andrew L Bender, in it he describes the drive that he invented.

You essentially have a dumbbell, with one of the spheres smaller than the other. http://large.stanford.edu/courses/ph210/raman1/images/f1big.gif The super heavy elements have to be SUPER heavy, think along the lines of neutronium. This dynamo will spin producing gravity waves, then you have another deformed dumbbell spinning the other way. This will propagate gravity waves in all directions. Producing a bubble, which you can use to isolate a small volume of space around you. Sort of like a warp bubble, but different since this bubble doesn't move. To make yourself move you deform the bubble into a egg shaped sphere, which, because of the pressure differential between the front and the back you move. Again very highly theoretical.

Cites: http://www.zamandayolculuk.com/cetinbal/HTMLdosya1/CurvedSpacetime.htm http://www.sr.bham.ac.uk/gravity/project.php?project=dragfree http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Ununoctium The gravity wave creates a isolated bubble through a pressure differential in the space between the crests of the waves.

Gravity waves are waves through the space time fabric. Space is warped everyday, this is what we know as gravity, And it is theoretically possible to create super heavy elements, In the future we can use these different fields of science and create the slip string drive. (This is highly theoretical.)