Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
.... But, let me add a comment to yours when you stated
that the m of "E=mc^2" is only of kinetic origin: What about
the rest mass? When you move relative to two masses, which
are at rest one with respect to the other, their masses include
kinetic as well as other energies: gravitational, chemical,
thermal energy,...Hence, not kinetic origin alone.
Good comment. To refresh my memory I looked into Special
Relativity. It begins with frames of reference, length contraction,
the twins paradox, etc. This is kinematics, right? At some point
a distinction between m_zero and m appears, both are inertial
[...]
After that point "a declaration" is made that the second term is
the "total energy" of an object. Gravitational potential energy
is not analyzed anywhere, the identity of two masses (inertial
and gravitational) is silently assumed. Perhaps those who
teach special relativity will correct me. My understanding is
that the inertial mass is the one which appears in 0.5*m*v^2
while the gravitational mass is the one that appears in m*g*h.