Blackholes Forum Message Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
 Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...The Space and Astronomy Agora I Looked At The Book Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response ToPosted by Richard Ruquist on January 10, 2003 13:53:18 UTC

His explanation of why there is no annihilation energy due to mass is based on the following calculation.

Take a positron and an electron at rest separated by a great distance and allow them to fly at each other due to the attraction of equal but opposite charges. He claims that they collide when their summed kinetic energies equal mc**2 where m is the rest mass of the electron. We can easily calculate the velocity of each particle from the conversation of energy and the well know expression for kinetic energy 1/2 m v**2

The result is that for the summed energies to be mc**2, the velocity of each particle must be c, the speed of light. That is impossible. No massive particle can attain the speed of light. Instead its effective mass increases and its velocity stays below the speed of light. So his analysis is incorrect because he leaves out relativistic effects.

But it is also wrong for another reason. His assumption that they collide when the summed energies are mc**2 is incorrect. That is just a numbers game. In collider experiments where electrons and positrons are collided, the kinetic energy of the electrons, which are relativistic to begin with (not at rest), are all taken into account.

Electrons are quantum particles and he is using a billiard ball analysis. To do this analysis correctly, it is necessary to know the wave functions of the two particles. Whether annihilation happens is then a matter of probability

It even fails as a billiard ball analysis. The two balls could attain mc**2 of kinetic energy while just skimming by each other. For a complete exchange of energy, the balls have to score a direct hit and his conditions do not require that.

Besides all that, the conversion of atomic and nuclear weapons into energy is well known and demonstrated horrificly. They would not explode if it were not for the energy of rest mass.

I have not found where he claims particles cannot be created yet. Of course, if that were true, there would be no particles in the universe.

yanniru