Norman Wells wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Jerry wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
snip

[ in reply to someone else ]
well at least 5 posters agree with me, none with you. So who
looks a
dickhead?


The you and the other five, were is the proof that you (and they)
are correct?

Claiming that you're correct just because others agree doesn't
mean that you are correct, many pages on Wikipedia are wrong but
because the consensus between those who shout the loudest on the
talk pages think that they are correct the page holds incorrect
information...

Because relativity says its so. ANY release of energy is accompanied
by a loss of mass.

Its vanishingly small for typical mechanical and chemical energy, but
its there just the same.

If it isn't, relativity is falsified, and there is a huge hue and cry
out for an alternative.

Then you have completely misuderstood relativity. Energy and mass are
interconvertible but only under specific circumstances you will not find
on earth outside nuclear reactions. If release of energy is accompanied
by a reduction in mass then what you've got is nuclear fission. If you
haven't got nuclear fission then you don't get reduction of mass.


Oh dear me no.

You do. Its just almost unmeasurable, due to the fact that C squared is
a frigging big number.

Outside of nuclear reactions, all you have is energy conservation and
mass conservation, and they are entirely separate. One form of energy
can be converted into another, but not into mass, and mass can never be
converted into energy.


Oh yes it can, it is and it does, BUT the changes are virtually
undetectable.


Storing electrical energy in a battery is actually a conversion of
electrical energy into chemical energy. Discharging the battery is the
reverse. Mass is not involved in any way, even infinitessimally. If
you think it is, you are just wrong, wrong, wrong.

No, you are wrong wrong wrong.

A chemical compound does not weigh QUITE the same as its elements taken
separately.

If you use the pseudo relativistic Newtonian model of electrons orbiting
the nucleus in the valency shells, they have changed their orbits when
involved in a compound. That change amounts to a quanta of energy gained
or lost and a corresponding quantum of mass gained or lost.


You can see the effect described and IIRC tested in terms of light
pressure on a sail ..photons - things with no rest mass at all, are
emitted by even chemical reactions, and can exert momentum changes on
things.