Quantcast

Got Homework?

Connect with other students for help. It's a free community.

  • across
    MIT Grad Student
    Online now
  • laura*
    Helped 1,000 students
    Online now
  • Hero
    College Math Guru
    Online now

Here's the question you clicked on:

55 members online
  • 0 replying
  • 0 viewing

Schrodinger Group Title

For s&g/the sake of knowing: If the universe, for some crazy reason, was completely devoid of gravity, would we able to find the mass of anything? I'm aware that we can measure the mass of objects in a massless environment by using a spring and looking at T=2(pi)(sqrt(m/k)), but that's based on the fact that we know the spring constant, as far as i'm aware, from experiments utilizing gravity on earth.

  • 2 years ago
  • 2 years ago

  • This Question is Closed
  1. Schrodinger Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    (i.e. So what would happen if we didn't know the spring constant beforehand, and we couldn't, at least through gravity.)

    • 2 years ago
  2. Algebraic! Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    inertia, things have mass independent of a local gravity field.

    • 2 years ago
  3. Schrodinger Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    ? Could you explain some more? :/

    • 2 years ago
  4. Schrodinger Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    (I'm aware they still have mass, but I don't know if we could measure it.)

    • 2 years ago
  5. Algebraic! Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    imagine an electron and a proton in deep space far away from any g field. the exert a force on each other. based on that force they accelerate according to F=ma.

    • 2 years ago
  6. Schrodinger Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Okay. So, inertia based on electrical properties? So, question on top of that, without electrical properties, would there be any way?

    • 2 years ago
  7. Algebraic! Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    it's mass: the 'resistance' to change in velocity

    • 2 years ago
  8. Schrodinger Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Not sure what the implications were of you just said.

    • 2 years ago
  9. Algebraic! Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    mass is intrinsic to particles. you don't need the* force of gravity to measure it. there are 4 forces, any of them will do.

    • 2 years ago
  10. Schrodinger Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Okay, so would it to be accurate to say that within the realm of classical mechanics, disavowing nuclear forces (I should've prefaced this with me saying that the experiment you would do to find out something's mass would be macroscopic, and relatively "intuitive" as opposed to quantum mechanics), EM and Gravity are the only ways you could find something's mass?

    • 2 years ago
  11. Algebraic! Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    a collision would probably do the trick too. collisions are problems involving mass and velocity that you can solve...

    • 2 years ago
  12. Schrodinger Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Could you give me a physical example of this (and relate the math to it, i'm guessing (blatantly assuming) you're talking about \[1/2mv ^{2} _{(1)} + 1/2mv ^{2} _{(2)} = E\] or something very closely related? The reason I ask is I think, and again, this is just a thought, that most of the variables involved in elastic collisions are somehow derived through mass or dependent on mass. I'm also just taking a second. \[v = d/t\] Okay, so you can determine velocity without mass. That could account for the velocities of both objects. So from here what could you do, using this equation, (assuming that what you would do) to figure out an object's mass?

    • 2 years ago
  13. Schrodinger Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    (By the way, thanks for this. I don't mean to be a bother by making this a super long thread or anything.)

    • 2 years ago
  14. Algebraic! Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    momentum and energy are conserved in ideal collisions, so you could find mass if you measured velocities before and after the collision.

    • 2 years ago
  15. Schrodinger Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    So, using: \[1/2mv ^{2} _{(x1)} + 1/2mv^{2} _{(y1)} = 1/2mv ^{2} _{(x2} + 1/2mv ^{2} _{(y2)}\]Mass could be determined. Just being totally clear.

    • 2 years ago
  16. Algebraic! Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    that's conservation of energy, momentum is conserved also. in fact momentum is conserved in any collision, KE is just conserved in elastic collisions.

    • 2 years ago
  17. Algebraic! Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    it's all interrelated anyway, you can't really get away from any one part of it. a particle is an excitation of 5 fields, it's a resonant excitation, it's stable and propagates. because only certain resonances can be stable, it couples very precisely to fields based on a charge. coupling to the EM field gives the traditional notion of charge: electric charge, coupling to the strong field gives 'color' charge, coupling to the Higg's field gives mass 'charge' (it's a little different than the charges of the other four fields). it's really just a bundle of coupling constants, and each constant defines a set of properties. coupling to the higg's field defines its mass.

    • 2 years ago
  18. Algebraic! Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    the fields make up space, (the exist even when there are no particles around), the way the space (fields) are bent by mass (the coupling to the higg's field) makes the gravitational force...

    • 2 years ago
  19. Schrodinger Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    O.O I'm not at Higgs-field/Higgs Boson level stuff other than a very basic conceptual understanding. All I know at this point in the convo is that while the Higgs Field is likely, it's still hypothetical and is at odds with SUSY regarding explaining dark matter.

    • 2 years ago
  20. Schrodinger Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    (Despite this summer and CERN.)

    • 2 years ago
  21. Algebraic! Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    well, they found the boson, and honestly, not much would work without the higg's field, mass would just be a random weird thing, two identical electrons could have wildly different masses for no particular reason...

    • 2 years ago
  22. Algebraic! Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    or no mass at all...

    • 2 years ago
  23. Schrodinger Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    They likely found the Boson, last I heard. It's overwhelmingly likely that they did, but it's not definite. I have to ask, do you know any of this stuff through your career/major/what you generally dedicate your life to, or are you just really good at Physics? lol.

    • 2 years ago
  24. Algebraic! Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    armchair physicist / electrical engineer

    • 2 years ago
  25. Schrodinger Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    YES that's exactly my double major! But i'm a freshman so I don't know what i'm doing yet, XD. Well, anyways, thank you for a very thought provoking convo and all, That gave me a pretty solid answer of my question until it got into stuff I don't understand yet.

    • 2 years ago
  26. Algebraic! Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    here's something you might not know that's related. the schrodinger wave equation, the one that describes a particle's probability to be in certain distribution or propagate... it's actually an expression of F=ma: it's the space derivative of energy = the time derivative of momentum: potential = -constant*ma !

    • 2 years ago
  27. Schrodinger Group Title
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Well, again, thank you very much! (And yeah, I didn't know that.)

    • 2 years ago
    • Attachments:

See more questions >>>

Your question is ready. Sign up for free to start getting answers.

spraguer (Moderator)
5 → View Detailed Profile

is replying to Can someone tell me what button the professor is hitting...

23

  • Teamwork 19 Teammate
  • Problem Solving 19 Hero
  • You have blocked this person.
  • ✔ You're a fan Checking fan status...

Thanks for being so helpful in mathematics. If you are getting quality help, make sure you spread the word about OpenStudy.

This is the testimonial you wrote.
You haven't written a testimonial for Owlfred.