Cliff wrote:
BB,
You are allowed to ask for help on this one but only by
crossposting asking for it g.

You have a 1 meter diameter spherical surface of
Unobtanium 597. It has no mass.
This material is 100% reflective in the entire electromagnetic
spectrum, has zero thermal conductivity, infinite strength and
reflects all known particles as well.

Inside this sphere is a 10 kilogram fissionable mass,
triggered to explode in a nuclear fireball at a huge efficiency
*at a random time*.

When it goes off half it's mass will, in the end,
become photons of various sorts and the particles that
remain will all be neutrons (and thus not interact with
the photons). The photons just keep bouncing off
the inside of the sphere ......

How much does the sphere and it's contents mass? When?
Remember Schrodinger's cat ...

Now, about all those photons (energy, right?) .....

Thought I'd start over a bit & add a few groups ....

So far the results are that *some* seem to be claiming that
photons have mass and that the mass remains constant as a
result.

Shu posted this as her "answer":
[
you do know that energy has mass right?

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/=ADphy...t_ma=ADss.html

]

Added questions:
What is the "missing mass" (or needed "dark matter")
of the universe compared to all of those photons in
the same universe? Someone in one of these groups probably
knows so I'm a bit curious. Perhaps a "photon energy per cubic
light second/second" compared to a "missing mass per cubic
light second" ratio or something ....
--=20
Cliff

CIhupr posted:

" So far the results are that *some* seem to be claiming that
photons have mass and that the mass remains constant as a
result."

Has anyone ever considered looking this up in a good Physics 101
textbook and putting this uninformed and largely incorrect speculation
to rest? (Halliday & Resnick's 'Fundamentals of Physics' would be a
good start.)

Out of curiousity, why is this being posted in
rec.creafts.metalworking?

Harry C.

wrote:
CIhupr posted:

" So far the results are that *some* seem to be claiming that
photons have mass and that the mass remains constant as a
result."

Has anyone ever considered looking this up in a good Physics 101
textbook and putting this uninformed and largely incorrect speculation
to rest? (Halliday & Resnick's 'Fundamentals of Physics' would be a
good start.)

Out of curiousity, why is this being posted in
rec.creafts.metalworking?

Harry C.


This is called "trolling". It's what trolls do.. how they confirm their
existence to themselves.

John

On 29 May 2005 13:22:56 -0700, wrote:

Has anyone ever considered looking this up in a good Physics 101
textbook and putting this uninformed and largely incorrect speculation
to rest? (Halliday & Resnick's 'Fundamentals of Physics' would be a
good start.)

Actually, I don't recall that as being in there specifically, though
it's been many years.
And I doubt that many have a copy of it anyway.

Out of curiousity, why is this being posted in
rec.creafts.metalworking?

Some there might have an interest. They have
quite the variety of odd interests IIRC.
--
Cliff

Cliff, there is such a thing as a library...generally a large building
containing many books...

Oh Hell, this dumb troll is not worth the effort of posting anything
more!

Harry C.