Reputation
343
Next privilege 500 Rep.
Access review queues
Badges
2 5 11
Impact
~50k people reached

  • 0 posts edited
  • 0 helpful flags
  • 4 votes cast
Feb
22
comment Where does the energy lost due to light emission come from?
If we have two atoms of the same element, but one of them has an electron in a higher orbit, would the gravitational field of each atom be exactly the same? or would one of them be stronger?
Feb
20
comment Where does the energy lost due to light emission come from?
Is that what happens when electrons jump into a lower orbit? They emit a photon as a consequence of that leap?
Feb
18
comment Where does the energy lost due to light emission come from?
Ok, so basically, there's more than one concept of mass. And the kind of mass you measure in a weighing machine is not affected at all when an object emits light. Is that it?
Feb
18
comment Where does the energy lost due to light emission come from?
You lost me on that last statement. You say that a full battery is slightly heavier but that its "rest mass" doesn't change? In what way the full battery is heavier then?
Feb
18
comment Where does the energy lost due to light emission come from?
I see. I remember long time ago I heard somebody explaining Einstein's E=m*c^2 as an actual mass loss when an object emits light.
Feb
18
comment Where does the energy lost due to light emission come from?
@ACuriousMind, you are kind of answering the question but in form of comments. It would be better if you did it as an actual answer.
Feb
18
comment Where does the energy lost due to light emission come from?
@ACuriousMind, I'll rephrase the question.
Feb
18
comment Where does the energy lost due to light emission come from?
@ACuriousMind, if I had an infrared camera, I'm sure I'll see plenty of them.
Feb
18
comment Where does the energy lost due to light emission come from?
@ACuriousMind, what about regular objects which are not being supplied with external energy? Like a pencil or a piece of paper.
Feb
18
comment Where does the energy lost due to light emission come from?
@ACuriousMind, why would it lose mass? It's my understanding that the light being radiated by an object must come from its mass. Does it not?
Dec
28
comment Why is quantum entanglement considered to be an active link between particles?
@LuboŇ°Motl, the last "it" in my previous comment refered to quantum entanglement, not quantum mechanics. I understand that QM is a self-contained theory, it doesn't need another theory to make sense of it.
Dec
25
comment Why is quantum entanglement considered to be an active link between particles?
@LuboŇ°Motl, what I don't understand from your answer is why Einstein called this "spooky action at a distance". Is it that Quantum Mechanics wasn't a complete science back then so there was no theory to explain it yet?
May
31
comment The speed limit is with respect to what?
@Nathaniel, unfortunately I don't have any books on relativity. I'm not a physics student, I ask this question just because I'm curious about these things.
May
31
comment The speed limit is with respect to what?
@Nathaniel, what was that answer he gave? can you post it as an answer?
May
31
comment The speed limit is with respect to what?
Can we think of this "apparent mass" as the inertia of an object?
Sep
16
comment Can light travel slower than the maximum?
It's almost philosophical. If all we have are measurement of light's speed, and all those measurements turn out to be the same independently of the (inertial) reference, then all we can say is that the perceived speed of light is always the same. But we can't say that light moves always at the same speed because our perception is affected by our own speed. That's what I mean when I said that what's constant is the perceived speed of light and not the speed itself.
Sep
16
comment Can light travel slower than the maximum?
I'm being misunderstood. What I'm saying is that if you know about the constantness of light's speed and if you wrongly assume that that constantness is w.r.t a fixed motionless point (like I initially did) then you would think that light should be measure at different speeds depending if you are moving of not. So my conclusion is that it's not the speed itself what's constant but the perception of it.
Sep
15
comment Can light travel slower than the maximum?
But if you do know about the constantness of light's speed, then you would think... if we flash a light backwards, and we are moving the other way at speed v, then w.r.t us the light should be moving at speed c + v. But evidence says otherwise. It's the perception of the speed what's constant, not the speed per se.
Sep
14
comment Can light travel slower than the maximum?
I'll accept your answer because you mention the fact that this is supported on empirical observations and not just somebody's theory. However, you say "He observes the light leaving his flashlight with a speed of u=+c" like it was an obvious fact, but that's exactly my question: why light's speed is not reduced like a tennis ball would. I guess the answer is... just because it's been seen experimentally that light behaves that way.
Nov
17
comment Why is the charge naming convention wrong?
so what was Franklin's mistake? To propose a naming convention?