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] |
The same cannot be said for "relativistic mass increase," which has
no observational basis. What we observe is that objects moving at
high speed have more momentum than that predicted by Newtonian
mechanics. There are two possible responses to this fact: 1) let the
mass of an object increase with velocity or 2) alter the dependence
of momentum on mass and velocity.
In either case the correction is exceedingly simple and noticeable
only at high velocities. The first response, however, leaves one
with myriad difficult if not unresolvable questions: How does one
actually measure the mass of a rapidly moving object? Where does the
extra "stuff" come from? What about gravitational effects?
The second response sidesteps all of those problems. Why on Earth
would anyone not choose it?
John Mallinckrodt
Cal Poly Pomona