Relativity - Mass Increase is a FRAUD
In this hub we will investigate the ridiculous claim made by Relativity’s Mass Increase Theory:
“The MASS of an object INCREASES as the object moves faster and faster up to near-c speeds.”
Relativists, or more specifically, mathematicians, have no clue what the word MASS means. They have never defined this word consistently. This is why they use the word MASS synonymously with WEIGHT, and with a multitude of many other terms as well,.....and they do so whenever it suits their arguments!
Mass (like time, distance-traveled, speed) is a scalar quantity (a conceptual relation) that we measure. The mathematicians have reified such concepts into objects. Then they move them around and make them “physically” interact with real objects, or they “stretch” or “increase” them. It is atoms that make up a real object, never “mass” or “weight” or “kilograms”. Mathematicians don't say that “the car” moved. They instead say that “the mass” of the car moved. In physics, mass (i.e. kilograms) does not move. Such notions belong in religion. And of course they believe in such nonsense as “moving mass” - they are mathematicians, NOT physicists!
In physics, there is a difference between “mass” and “matter”. Mass is only used in the context of dynamic concepts (ie. math scalar quantities), while matter (atoms) is used in the context of real objects which have the intrinsic property of shape. These terms cannot be used synonymously, like mathematicians use them in the religion of Relativity.
History of Mass Increase
The “belief” that mass increases with velocity has become the vindication of Special Relativity. It is purported to be ‘verified’ in particle accelerators. But such wild claims are never explained rationally,.....they are only asserted!
The belief that mass increases with velocity can be traced back to an almost forgotten experiment published in 1901 by Walter Kaufmann. Kaufmann showed that when electrons are accelerated to velocities close to the speed of light, the ratio of charge to mass, e/m, does not remain constant, as had been expected, but decreases. He and others jumped to the irrational conclusion that a variation in mass, not in electrons, must be responsible. Kaufmann found that e/m decreased more rapidly with velocity than predicted by the Gamma Factor of Relativity, and this was initially interpreted as evidence that Einstein’s theory was falsified.
In anticipation of such experimental conclusions, Special Relativity axiomatically declared that light can have no mass, since any entity having mass becomes infinitely ‘heavy’ if it moves at the speed of light. And this saved Relativity for the time being.
But all this should have been a warning that physics was moving down the wrong path. How can anybody draw conclusions from subjective observations stemming from experiments, and declare that activity to be Scientific?
At that time, no one entertained the idea that the ratio e/m decreases because the charge of the electron, e, decreases with increasing velocity. Of course not! Relativity was gaining momentum in the scientific community and they would not allow anybody to deviate them from their course; as is the case today.
At the beginning of the twentieth century the sub-atomic nature of matter was not yet understood (is it now?). The nature of radiation was a total mystery (X-rays had just been discovered, and it was concluded that radium emitted two types of ‘radiation’, alpha and beta rays. Such nonsense led them to irrationally conclude that atoms are not the fundamental, basic, indivisible building blocks of nature. It was easier for them to deal with MASS as the variable, and the electron as the constant, in the inseparable connection e/m.
So What is MASS?
Mass is typically defined by the mathematicians as “the quantity of X”, where X usually designates matter (atoms).
All quantities are concepts that were invented by man. The Universe embodies a relation of objects and space, not “mass”. Mass is purely a conceptual relation of a measured quantity. It takes a human with a brain to perform such magical wizardries, as counting and relating. And this is obvious because the SI unit for mass is the “kilogram”. This means that the “mass” of an object is the same as the “weight” of the object.
So is the mass of an object the MEASURE of the amount of matter? Of course it is, because weight is also a MEASURE of the amount of matter. We have no idea how many atoms comprise the object because this is impossible to determine. All we know is how much it weighs!
But the most popular argument comes from neophytes, and it goes as follows:
"Excuse me sir! But on the Moon, my weight would be 28 lbs, and yet my mass would still be 170 lbs, as it is on Earth."
The fatal flaw with such reasoning is that if humans evolved on the Moon and had never visited Earth, this person would say that his weight on Earth is 170 lbs, while his mass would still be 28 lbs, just as it is on the Moon!
Therefore, on the Moon, this person’s weight and mass are BOTH 28 lbs. No exception!
We don’t even need to go to the Moon to perform a basic test of this. In fact, if you take the kilogram Standard from France to the North Pole, its weight and, therefore, its mass changes. We measure mass the same way we measure weight. Indeed, Einstein claimed to have “proved” (in Math they always 'prove') that Inertial and Gravitational mass are one and the same. So as far as Einstein was concerned, this issue is settled.
So the notion that “mass” has anything to do with the number of atoms in an object is utter nonsense.
There is no difference whatsoever between MASS and WEIGHT. The only reason the “MASS is not equal to WEIGHT” fallacy is perpetuated by the mathematicians, is because they want to defend and protect their conceptual notion of Relativistic Mass, .....which is nothing but a nonsensical concept that no Relativist can explain rationally.
MASS is NOT a Physical Property of Matter!
Atoms don’t have numbers written on them by God. As such, the atoms comprising the Earth cannot be counted by nature. It takes a human brain with memory to conceptualize such artificial notions as “counting”. Therefore, mass is not an intrinsic property of objects.
So if a nearby planet was accelerated to near-c speeds during a supernova explosion,.....it is obvious that the mass of the planet will not change. The planet doesn’t even have any property called “mass”, so how can it change?
So what are Relativists trying to say when they irrationally claim that “the mass of the planet increases”?
1) Are they saying that the planet somehow acquired more and more ATOMS as its speed was accelerated to near-c?
2) If so, then how is it possible for these extra atoms to magically materialize from nothing, and yet manage to assemble in their correct molecular configurations within the planet?
3) And where did these extra atoms disappear to, after the speed of the planet decelerated when it was captured in orbit by a massive star?
Einstein’s Theory of Relativity posits the ridiculous claim that a concept, such as “mass”, increases with the increasing speed of an object. But when its physical interpretations are analyzed, it is irrational to claim that concepts increase, or that even objects magically acquire extra atoms during motion. Relativity is a Religion that posits surrealism in the reality of nature, and thus has absolutely nothing to do with Physics.
More by this Author
This article provides a physical explanation for WHY the night sky is dark. No magic, no irrationalities, no contradictions. Just a physical mechanism that answers Olbers' unanswered question!
The Universe is eternal. Matter & space cannot be created or destroyed. To assert a theory of a beginning, under any context....is an ONTOLOGICAL CONTRADICTION and completely IMPOSSIBLE!
Introduction Many car audio fanatics will use a power capacitor as an alleged secondary, passive storage device to supply current to their amplifiers. The capacitor is advertised to act as a supplemental power supply...