Relativity and its demerits.

[geordief]

4 minutes ago, swansont said:

Energy is a property of things. So no, energy does not behave as a particle. Electrons do, though. The have energy and momentum. They also behave like waves.

And yet they do, which is perfectly consistent with the theories that predict such behavior. Again, if you want to call this into question, you need to show where experiment does not conform with theory. For example, if photons had mass, they would not travel at c. Yet there is no experimental evidence that this is the case.

I may have been told this before ,but you are clearly saying that c is not just the speed of light.

 

Would you remind me again what c is derived from?  (not from the Maxwell equations surely since  light is just a form of electromagnetic radiation.. and those equations ,if I am right give a figure for the speed of em radiation.)

[swansont]

6 minutes ago, geordief said:

I may have been told this before ,but you are clearly saying that c is not just the speed of light.

c is a speed limit that just happens to be the speed limit for massless things, like light.

6 minutes ago, geordief said:

Would you remind me again what c is derived from?  (not from the Maxwell equations surely since  light is just a form of electromagnetic radiation.. and those equations ,if I am right give a figure for the speed of em radiation.)

c can be derived from Maxwell's equations plus experiment. The permeability and permittivity of free space dictate the speed of EM waves in a vacuum. I'm not sure it can be "derived" elsewhere. 

[geordief]

8 minutes ago, swansont said:

c is a speed limit that just happens to be the speed limit for massless things, like light.

c can be derived from Maxwell's equations plus experiment. The permeability and permittivity of free space dictate the speed of EM waves in a vacuum. I'm not sure it can be "derived" elsewhere. 

Is there a formula for the relative speed of two objects  which takes into account their mass  and so tends to c as mass decreases to zero  in the limit?

 

I mean ,from a standing start. If we have  two objects and ,just using the energetic resources internally available use these resources  to accelerate  apart is there such a formula which gives their relative velocity  (in a vacuum of course)  and has their masses as a variable in the equation?

[swansont]

24 minutes ago, geordief said:

Is there a formula for the relative speed of two objects  which takes into account their mass  and so tends to c as mass decreases to zero  in the limit?

 

I mean ,from a standing start. If we have  two objects and ,just using the energetic resources internally available use these resources  to accelerate  apart is there such a formula which gives their relative velocity  (in a vacuum of course)  and has their masses as a variable in the equation?

The relativistic formula for kinetic energy or momentum would show this.

[TakenItSeriously]

questioning the rest mass of a photon is a moot point since it's more like a hypothetical stat that doesn't ever exist relative to any observer.

The reason why is that all photons are always moving at the speed of light no matter how fast the observer moves which is one of the two premises of SR.

It's this premise that causes space and time to contract or dilate when viewed from a different inertial refeerence frame.

 

 

[Strange]

10 hours ago, ovi issac said:

I am claiming that eneisteins theory was lacking few concepts like relative mass of something that had zero mass OK u explain it 

EINSTEIN not eneisteins

YOU not u

And it has already been explained. You just refuse to accept the explanation (or are incapable of understanding it).

Quote

What typing words etc are u vituperating me 

Your English is execrable.