Photon→Energy→Mass→Gravity?

[Daecon]

How much does a photon weigh?

 

According to E=mc² if a photon is made of energy, it would have a (albeit an exceptionally small) mass, therefore it should exert a gravitational influence on it's surroundings, shouldn't it?

 

Which brings me to another question: do high-energy photons move slower then low-energy photons?

 

If they really are heavier, then should they be not quite able to reach the maximum speed limit, as there's more photon to move around...?

[5614]

Photons do not have mass. However there are different types of mass: inertial mass, rest mass, relativistic mass etc.

 

Normally when you say 'mass' you mean rest mass, this is your mass when you are at rest (or still, not accelerating). As a photon cannot stop or rest (it always travels at the speed of light) it cannot have a rest mass.

 

The equation [math]e = mc^2[/math] is not the full equation, the full equation is [math]e^2 = (pc)^2 + (m_0 c^2)^2[/math] or [math]e^2 = p^2 c^2 + m^2 c^4[/math] (they're the same thing!)

 

Photons all travel at the same speed.

 

Your last para: If what are heavier??? Energy doesn't weight anything

[Johnny5]

Photons all travel at the same speed.

 

 

Are you basing this conclusion on Maxwell's equations?

[YT2095]

"Photon→Energy→Mass→Gravity? " why stop there, Gravity can curve SPACE and that in turn can affect the Photon path!

 

actualy you can branch from the Photon to Magnetism as well

[Johnny5]

"Photon→Energy→Mass→Gravity? " why stop there, Gravity can curve SPACE and that in turn can affect the Photon

 

I don't believe gravity curves space at all. In fact, I am starting to think that gravity might be related to magnetism.

 

Do you know what the Van Allen belt is?

 

Kind regards

[5614]

Are you basing this conclusion on Maxwell's equations?

I based it on the 2nd postulate of special relativety and yeah, Maxwell's equations show the same thing.

[YT2095]

sorry we doubled up as I was editing my post.

 

Van Allen belt, yes I do, why?

[5614]

I don't believe gravity curves space at all. In fact' date=' I am starting to think that gravity might be related to magnetism.

 

Do you know what the Van Allen belt is?[/quote']

 

Yes I do and I don't see how two belts, one of mainly protons, one of mainly electrons relates magnetism to gravity .

[Johnny5]

sorry we doubled up as I was editing my post.

 

Van Allen belt' date=' yes I do, why?[/quote']

 

I am wondering whether or not the gravitational force is partly magnetic.

 

What is the Van Allen belt?

[Johnny5]

I based it on the 2nd postulate of special relativety and yeah, Maxwell's equations show the same thing.

 

 

Yes they show the same thing, but the second postulate of relativity is not an empirical fact.

 

Regards

[Johnny5]

Yes I do and I don't see how two belts, one of mainly protons, one of mainly electrons relates magnetism to gravity .

 

What if the sun emits umm

 

magnetic monopoles?

[5614]

What if the sun emits umm

 

magnetic monopoles?

 

The sun is not a magnetic monopole.

 

No true magnetic monopole has ever been discovered or detected.

 

Why does the Sun look like a magnetic S-polarity monopole

[Johnny5]

The sun is not a magnetic monopole.

 

No true magnetic monopole has ever been discovered or detected.

 

Why does the Sun look like a magnetic S-polarity monopole

 

I didn't say the sun was a magnetic monopole at all. I just said, what if the sun emits them.

 

Well what if there were magnetic monopoles, what would Maxwell's equations look like then?

[5614]

Well what if there were magnetic monopoles, what would Maxwell's equations look like then?

I don't know, but as magnetic monopoles have been searched for and as they have not been found I am not worrying about it yet! That may sound ignorant or rude, but I'm not going to try and include something into an equation which already works fine when most physicists believe that the thing (magnetic monopoles) are not possible!

 

I didn't say the sun was a magnetic monopole at all. I just said, what if the sun emits them.

I'm being honest here... I really do not understand what you just said!!! The sun emits a variety of things, but why would the sun emit a magnetic monopole? I don't know what you are talking about, but as magnetic monopoles have never been detected I'm not sure what you are saying can be correct, I mean sure, you're saying "what if" and I'm saying "what if what?..."

[YT2095]

1) I am wondering whether or not the gravitational force is partly magnetic.

 

2) What is the Van Allen belt?

 

1. Magnetism and Gravity are 2 seperate and distinct nuclear forces, they share a commonality in behaviour to some extent, but that as far as it goes.

 

2. Google for it

[swansont]

Yes they show the same thing' date=' but the second postulate of relativity is not an empirical fact.

[/quote']

 

Neither are any of the laws of physics, for that matter. At what point, when all your observations match the models, do you get to call thing facts?

 

Stephen Jay Gould had this to say on the matter: In science, "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms.

 

By that standard, the speed of light being constant under the conditions of SR is indeed a fact.

 

Absent any actual evidence, objections to c being constant, or gravity being magnetism for that matter, do not "merit equal time in the classroom."

[Daecon]

Photons do not have mass. However there are different types of mass: inertial mass' date=' rest mass, relativistic mass etc.

 

Normally when you say 'mass' you mean rest mass, this is your mass when you are at rest (or still, not accelerating). As a photon cannot stop or rest (it always travels at the speed of light) it cannot have a rest mass.

 

The equation [math']e = mc^2[/math] is not the full equation, the full equation is [math]e^2 = (pc)^2 + (m_0 c^2)^2[/math] or [math]e^2 = p^2 c^2 + m^2 c^4[/math] (they're the same thing!)

 

Photons all travel at the same speed.

 

Your last para: If what are heavier??? Energy doesn't weight anything

 

Different types of mass? But aren't all masses made up of energy anyway?

 

I'm pretty sure energy does weigh something - after all, a moving pendulum weighs more than one at rest.

[Johnny5]

Absent any actual evidence' date=' objections to c being constant, or gravity being magnetism for that matter, do not "merit equal time in the classroom."[/quote']

 

I understand your point Dr Swanson.

 

But what about MY idea that gravity is magnetism?

 

Is it possible?

[5614]

after all, a moving pendulum weighs more than one at rest.

As you move faster several things happen:

 

Time slows down (time dilation),

Your mass increases &

Length Contraction.

 

Different types of mass?

There are different types of mass:

 

Rest mass -- this is your mass when you are at rest or not moving, it is the mass in the equation e=mc2

 

Relativistic mass -- your mass when you are in motion relative to the observer.

 

Inertial mass -- is a measure of an objects inertia.

 

But aren't all masses made up of energy anyway?

Just because energy and matter are different forms of the same thing (as shown by e=mc2) does not mean they are the same thing.

 

Something which has energy doesn't have to have mass.

[CPL.Luke]

technically magnetism doesn't exist under special relativity its just the electric force in motion. google electrodynamics

 

 

also correct me if I'm wrong but a more proper equation for special relativity would be [math]e=gamma *mc^2[/math]

 

where gamma is the lorentz factor which is [math]1/squrt( 1- (v/c)^2)[/math]

[□h=-16πT]

I understand your point Dr Swanson.

 

But what about MY idea that gravity is magnetism?

 

Is it possible?

 

Well if you can unify the two or come up with a theory that describes gravity as some form of electromagnetism then yes. Why do you think this? Is it just some wild assertion?

[swansont]

I understand your point Dr Swanson.

 

But what about MY idea that gravity is magnetism?

 

Is it possible?

 

What's your evidence?

[Johnny5]

What's your evidence?

 

Earth has a magnetic field. The evidence is my compass.

 

The earth precesses. The evidence is the Foucalt pendulum.

 

So the sun is emitting particles, we feel its warmth.

 

If they interact with the earth's magnetic field, somehow, then umm

 

well then umm

 

they can rock the earth.

 

Make it wobble.

 

Make it precess, just like ummm

in an hydrogen atom...

 

The Zeeman effect.

 

How is that for evidence?

[Johnny5]

Well if you can unify the two or come up with a theory that describes gravity as some form of electromagnetism then yes. Why do you think this? Is it just some wild assertion?

 

Let the theory be that magnetic monopoles exist.

 

Therefore, it is not the case that:

 

[math] \nabla \bullet \vec B = 0 [/math]

 

Where B denotes magnetic field.

 

That is exactly what I was thinking of doing. Writing gravity as electromagnetic force. Change the constants. Something like that.

 

I think this because of the Van Allen belt, and the precession of

this planet.

 

Regards

 

 

I will come up with something more mathematical in a moment.

 

The earth is already tilted. Here is the angle:

 

Earth is tilted in the following RANGE:

 

[math] 22^{\circ} \ \ \text{to} \ \ 24.5^{\circ} [/math]

 

Here is my source.

 

Notice the following statement:

 

Near June 21st, the summer solstice, the Earth is tilted such that the Sun is positioned directly over the Tropic of Cancer at 23.5 degrees north latitude.[/i']

 

 

This requires a lot of thought to understand, a starchart will help to understand it.

 

 

Here is an article on the tropic of cancer

 

Paraphrased slightly from wikipedia:

 

The tropic of cancer (latin for crab), is one of five circles of latitude that mark maps of the earth. The exact positition of this line of latitude that runs parallel to the earth's equator, is: 23 degrees, 26 minutes, and 22 seconds. What is special about this line of latitude is this:

 

It is the farthest northern latitude at which the sun can appear directly overhead.

 

Regions of this earth, which lie above the tropic of cancer, are in what is called the "Northern temperate zone." This zone runs from the tropic of cancer up to the arctic circle, located at 66.5 degrees north latitude.

 

The southern temperate zone, runs from the tropic of capricorn (located at 23 degrees, 26 minutes, 22 seconds south latitude of this planet, all the way to the Antarctic circle.

 

So, now here is the thing:

 

In order to understand this, it helps to imagine yourself in one of the countries that the line of caner runs through.

 

I know some geography. Consider Africa.

 

Along the cusp, there is Ivory Coast, there is Ghana, Nigeria, I think in that order.

 

And from memory, the point (0,0) is just below Nigeria, i think six degress south or something like that, its just off the coast of Africa, in the water. It might be 6 degrees below Ghana actually.

 

So we need one of the countries further north, from a map...

 

There is a mountain range lying along the tropic of cancer, called the Ahaggar mountains. This mountain range lies right along the border of three different African countries, Niger, Algeria, and Mali.''

 

So suppose we are situatued way high up in those mountains, on June 21st. here is what will happen. At 12:00 noon, the sun will be directly over our heads. All we have to do, is look straight up into the air, and we will see the sun.

 

Afterwards, in order to have the same effect happen, we have to begin walking directly towards the south pole.

 

Now, after some period of time passes, the same effect will occur at the tropic of capricorn. I will have the date in a moment.

 

Ok, here are the facts:

 

 

Definition: The summer solstice is defined to be the day at which the sun reaches its highest point above the equator, as the earth wobbles in its slightly elliptical orbit about the sun. The exact line of latititude is 23 degrees, 26 minutes, 22 seconds north latitude, and the exact day of this is June 21st (though this varies slightly).

 

 

Definition: The winter solstice is defined to be the day at which the sun reaches its lowest point below the equator, as the earth wobbles in its slightly elliptical orbit about the sun. The exact line of latidude is 23 degrees, 26 minutes, 22 seconds south latitude, and the exact day of this is December 21st. (though this varies slightly).

 

 

So the two dates to remember are:

 

June 21st, and December 21st.

 

Count the months between them

July 21st

August 21st

September 21st

October 21st

November 21st

December 21st

 

Exactly six.

[[Tycho?]]

Earth has a magnetic field. The evidence is my compass.

 

The earth precesses. The evidence is the Foucalt pendulum.

 

So the sun is emitting particles' date=' we feel its warmth.

 

If they interact with the earth's magnetic field, somehow, then umm

 

well then umm

 

they can rock the earth.

 

Make it wobble.

 

Make it precess, just like ummm

in an hydrogen atom...

 

The Zeeman effect.

 

How is that for evidence?[/quote']

 

I think "lacking" would be an appropraite word.