Another Special Relativity Anomaly Question

[Dov]

Is this correct?

As an object's speed approaches the speed of light, the following occur:

The object's mass increases (Assuming an object with intrinsic mass)

The distance it travels contracts (From the point of view of the observer in the relative time frame)

Time slows down (For the object relative to the observers time)


Do I have this basically right?

Am I missing something important?

[daryn]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
The distance it travels contracts (From the point of view of the observer in the relative time frame)


[/ QUOTE ]

i believe you are referring to the object itself actually contracting in length, in the direction it is traveling in.

[MelchyBeau]

Relativistic mass is sort of a misnomer. Its mass doesn't actually increase. Remember we have the conservation of mass and energy laws. If it were to increase, then these laws would be violated. Also relativistic mass isa term no longer used by physicists. They discuss things in terms of energy

You'd be wise to study lorentz transformations if you wish to understand relativity.

Melch

[Dov]

Thanks.

I looked at the lorentz transformations, and only partially understand it.

That's why I posted this, to see how far off track I was getting. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[coolhandluke]

on a very crude, laymens level, that is correct.

[Triumph36]

Nitpick: Time 'slows down' is ambiguous.. more time elapses in the resting system than in the moving system.

[Dov]

[ QUOTE ]
on a very crude, laymens level, that is correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

We laymen have to start somewhere!

Thanks.

[usmhot]

You need to be quite clear on your frames or reference ... lets say frame A is one observer and in frame B is the object and another observer travelling at close to the speed of light relative to frame A ... then

1. to the observer in frame A the mass of the object in frame B appears to increase
to the observer in frame B the mass of the object does not appear to change

2. to the observer in frame A the length of the object in frame B appears to contract in the direction of motion
to the observer in frame B the object does not appear to change shape

3. to the observer in frame A the distance to be travelled by the object does not appear to change
to the observer in frame B the distance to be travelled by the object appears to contract in the direction of motion
(note: assuming the distance is marked off by two points x and y which are motionless relative to frame A)

4. to the observer in frame A time in frame B appears to move more slowly
to the observer in frame B time in frame B does not appeaqr to change (but time in frame A appears to slow down)

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
Relativistic mass is sort of a misnomer. Its mass doesn't actually increase.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, it does, according to some conventions. No object can move faster than c, but its momentum is unbounded. If you want, you can think of the additional mass as the mass of the kinetic energy.

[ QUOTE ]
Remember we have the conservation of mass and energy laws. If it were to increase, then these laws would be violated.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, they wouldn't.

If you ignore relativistic mass, and only use rest-mass, you make it much harder to describe conservation of momentum, and the fact that light has momentum despite its zero rest-mass.