geordief Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 Is the gravitational attraction of a massive body greater depending on its temperature? Does the energy in the heat of the object contribute to curving space-time around it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 If you have two otherwise identical bodies, the one at higher temperature has more mass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordief Posted October 15, 2016 Author Share Posted October 15, 2016 If you have two otherwise identical bodies, the one at higher temperature has more mass. What about rotation ? if it is perfectly symmetrical does it also increase mass? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sensei Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 What about rotation ? If you have spinning wheel, and touch it by other object, creating friction on contact area, they'll be both heated. If wheel would not spinning, nothing would happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 What about rotation ? if it is perfectly symmetrical does it also increase mass? Rotation also increases mass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MigL Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 And before you ask... A compressed spring ( or a stretched spring ) also has more energy, and equivalent mass. Any energy added to a system increases its equivalent mass. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raider5678 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 Is the gravitational attraction of a massive body greater depending on its temperature? Does the energy in the heat of the object contribute to curving space-time around it? You can see this based off of mass = energy\C².A heated object has more thermal energy then a none heated one, so its mass is larger. A roataing object has more kinetic? Energy then a none rotating one, so more mass. A loaded spring has more elastic potential energy so it has more mass. This is the famous equation produced by Einstein in special realativiy, just in different terms, other wise the same thing but you change to order. Someone else explain what that means I'm not getting it. But say a planet has 7 billion people, and everyone picks up a 10 pound weight. Even though the gravitational potential energy has increased, they used mechanical? energy to pick it up. This means no energy was added so the mass stays the same. Hope this helps. Also, by curving the space time around it I think you meant gravity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 And before you ask... A compressed spring ( or a stretched spring ) also has more energy, and equivalent mass. Any energy added to a system increases its equivalent mass. Not quite. CoM kinetic energy is accounted for separately in the total energy equation. You can see this based off of mass = energy\C². Which only holds if p=0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.C.MacSwell Posted October 19, 2016 Share Posted October 19, 2016 Not quite. CoM kinetic energy is accounted for separately in the total energy equation. Which only holds if p=0 MigL did say system... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted October 19, 2016 Share Posted October 19, 2016 MigL did say system... Systems can undergo translational motion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.C.MacSwell Posted October 19, 2016 Share Posted October 19, 2016 Systems can undergo translational motion. Does it add energy to the system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 Does it add energy to the system? Energy, yes. Mass, no. CoM translational KE is accounted for separately in relativity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.C.MacSwell Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 Energy, yes. Mass, no. CoM translational KE is accounted for separately in relativity. Sorry, but I beg to differ. A physical system is something defined for the purpose of analysis, and wrt the system the CoM translational energy is always zero. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 Sorry, but I beg to differ. A physical system is something defined for the purpose of analysis, and wrt the system the CoM translational energy is always zero. But you don't have to analyze a system in its CoM frame. You can be in any frame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MigL Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 OK, OK... JC understood what I was trying to say. But Swansont is equally right, I could have been more clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now