The Nature of Mass

We have all been taught in our physics classes that mass is one of the
fundamental entities of our reality and that all of the effects occurring in
our Universe are dependent on interactions between masses. It behooves us then
to examine what we know of mass.

About 40 years ago the writer came across the observation in a Scientific
American article that, in the equation E=M*C^2 there can only be two
independent variables. One of those variables, E, M, or C must be dependent
upon the other two. If we look at the velocity of light, C, it is obvious that
it must be one of the independent variables. Since velocity involves only
length and time, we can measure the velocity of light under conditions that are
independent of either mass or energy. Similarly, it is obvious that energy, E,
is an independent variable since energy involves only force and length, we can
also measure it under conditions that are independent of the velocity of light
and of mass. There remains only mass to be examined.

If one wished to determine the mass of an object, one could weigh it
(gravitational mass), shake it (inertial mass) or observe the amount of energy
released if it where annihilated. Weighing a mass provides a measurement of its
mass but the observation is made in terms of a reference mass (e.g.- the mass
of the Earth) and, in effect, we would then be defining the mass in terms of
another mass. This is hardly an acceptable solution since it leads to a dead
end. Annihilating the mass is a legitimate solution providing one can measure
the energy content of the end products without relying on a measurement of
their mass (such a reliance would be a form of circular reasoning). The
remaining possibility is to measure the inertial properties of the mass by, for
example, shaking it and measuring the force required to produce an a given
acceleration. This type of measurement involves force, length, and time, all of
which are directly observable and does not suffer form the limitations of the
other methods. What we would then be doing is measuring mass as the incremental
impulse required to produce an incremental change in velocity. (In the case of
photons and neutrinos it might be desirable to remove the word "incremental"
from the measurement since these particles exist only at the velocity of
light). Seen in this light, what we consider to be mass is actually a property
which is an indication of the energy required to change the velocity of the
quantity of energy defined by E=M*C^2. With this definition, the Lorentz
Transformation for Mass becomes equal to the cube of the accepted value and
allows problems involving STR to be solved without resorting to momentum. This
conclusion is consistent with STR because the conventional Lorentz
Transformation results when one integrates this transformation between the
limits of 0 and V.

An intellectual difficulty occurs when one considers the so-called
"massless" particles. They have this name because they have no "rest mass". A
reasonable man would consider such a terminology to be frivolous because these
particles exist only when traveling at the velocity of light. They have no
"rest mass" because they don't exist at rest. These so called "massless"
particles do however, possess inertial mass as evidenced by the radiation
pressure they exert when their velocity vectors are altered, either by
reflection or absorption. They provide the same reaction force as would a
material particle of the same relativistic mass that was traveling
infinitesimally close to the velocity of light. They also experience
gravitational forces that are twice the force that would be experienced by a
material particle of the same energy. A simple “thought experiment� as
outlined in Part 4 of http://members.aol.com/einsteinhoax/gravity.htm easily
shows this. (The writer has received a rather cryptic E-mail from someone who
apparently is associated with the physics establishment to the effect that the
photon imparts momentum because its energy is equal to the product of its
frequency and Plank's Constant and it is traveling at the velocity of light.
The sender denied vehemently that the expression E=M*C^2 and the idea that even
though the photon contains energy and imparts a momentum equivalent to a mass
of that energy traveling at the velocity of light, means that the photon has
mass. Bertrand Russell is reported to have said that the sign of a great mind
is the ability to hold two mutually exclusive beliefs at the same time. The
writer disagrees with him. That ability is the sign of a mind which is too lazy
to resolve the contradiction and/or is too damn lazy or too damn stupid to
resolve it)

The inertial and gravitational masses of the so-called "massless"
particles have a significant effect on our understanding of cosmology. A back
of the envelope calculation suggests that the inertial mass of these particles,
as evidenced by the 3 degree Kelvin radiation temperature of space, exceeds the
inertial mass of the matter in our Universe by a factor of 10. When we consider
that neutrinos are formed in nucleons that have 1800 times the energy content
of the source of photons (electrons), it may be possible that the mass of
neutrinos outweighs the mass of photons by a factor of 1800! Looked at it in
this light, our Universe may actually be a gasbag of photons and neutrinos
filled with a miniscule amount of the dust we call matter. Rather than being
the King of the Universe, what we call as matter may actually be only a
miniscule contaminant.

If we examine the radiation pressure produced by the observed level of
photons in space, it is easy to see why space appears to be expanding.
Radiation pressure is counteracting the gravitational pressure. It is also easy
to understand why the dynamics of galaxies appears to be skewed by what is
termed "dark matter". There would seem to be no need to postulate the existence
of "dark matter" until the gravitational and inertial effects of the photons
and neutrinos that populate the Universe have been amply explored. This has not
been done, primarily because these particles have been foolishly defined as
"massless".

The source material for this posting may be found in "Gravity" (1987),
"The Einstein Hoax" (1997), and "Corrections to Residual Errors in Special
Relativity (1999) located at http://www.members.aol.com/einsteinhoax/site.htm.
EVERYTHING WHICH WE ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING ELSE WE
HAVE ACCEPTED AS TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST
BE MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET THIS
REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP FROM
THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.

Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on a
regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy as
they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts, please
do not raise objections that are not related to material that you have read at
the Website. This posting is merely a summary.

E-mail:-

The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 5 years.
In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE MATERIAL
PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by individuals who have
mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without questioning it. If anyone
provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be objectively answered, the
material at the Website will be withdrawn.