On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 11:11:05PM -0500, Terren Suydam wrote: > Ahhh, makes sense, you know, in the absurd way that anything in relativity > or QM makes sense. > > One more question. A mass is hurtling through space (not in orbit, to keep > things simple). In the mass's frame of reference it has zero kinetic > energy. It is at rest. From the perspective of a nearby planet, the mass > has a certain amount of kinetic energy. Does that mean its mass changes > depending on the frame of reference it is being observed from? >
Yes. Google the term "rest mass", which is instrinsic to the object, and contrast that with "relativistic mass", which is the measured mass by an observer travelling at some velocity relative to the object. For example, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_in_special_relativity. Cheers -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Senior Research Fellow hpco...@hpcoders.com.au Economics, Kingston University http://www.hpcoders.com.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
