: Continued.

: "What quantum mechanics says is that energy can be viewed as a mass or a particle." :

: Quantum mechanics does not say that energy can be viewed as a mass or a particle. It says that electromagnetic energy/radiation is quantized, where the energy of the quantum (photon) = (h bar)*(frequency).

E=h-bar * f E=mc^2

mc^2 = h-bar * f = E

Mass is proportional to frequency is proportional to energy. The allowed values of E, F, m are quantized as per Schroedingers Wave Equation and Diracs Wave Equation.

The above simple equation gives rise to the concept of "binding energy" where the weak nuclear forces (energy) holding an atomic nucleus together is released as mass (neutrons, electrons, positrons, neutrinos) during nuclear decay.

: A single photon cannot have a rest mass, as this would preclude it from propagating at the speed of light, which would be pretty strange, since it is light.

Light has no rest mass, you are right. Yet light exerts a pressure as if it was a particle with momentum and hence a mass.

Do you know about T Tauri stars that have the surrounding gas "blown away" by this massless particle called a photon. What of the atmospheres of stars being blown away by the massless neutrino in Supernovae.

Energy and mass are synonymous.

: "in the same way photons are carriers of the weak nuclear force.

: Photons are not carriers of the weak force. The weak force is mediated by the W and Z bosons which are in a category similar to gluons.

I admit I made a mistake, photons carry EM forces.

These bosons are do not belong to the same category as gluons. Gluons carry colour forces - strong nuclear force. The vector bosons are carriers of the weak nuclear forcce. The gluon is a specific boson distinct from the W and Z vector boson, all they share is that they obey bose-einstein statistics.

As photons are bosons are you saying gluons are in the same category as gluons. Can you say SU(3).

: As I said earlier maybe you should stick to asking questions, not answering them

The same, it seems, goes for you. There are so many errors in your corrections it would take too much of time to teach you real physics.

• Re: Continued - thed/">thed - December 16, 1998 - 12:53 UTC