June 29, 2005
The Mysteries of Mass
From Scientific American:
Most people think they know what mass is, but they understand only part of the story. For instance, an elephant is clearly bulkier and weighs more than an ant. Even in the absence of gravity, the elephant would have greater mass--it would be harder to push and set in motion. Obviously the elephant is more massive because it is made of many more atoms than the ant is, but what determines the masses of the individual atoms? What about the elementary particles that make up the atoms--what determines their masses? Indeed, why do they even have mass?
More here.
Posted by Azra Raza at 06:19 AM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/2732752
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Mysteries of Mass :
Comments
Robert Millikan (1868-1953) was one of the great physicists of the twentieth century. He discovered one of the most simple and elegant experiments in the history of physics, which provided one of the most profound results in the history of physics; namely, that the electric charge is quantized in integral units of the charge on an electron and no other units. The work was performed at the University of Chicago in about 1909, for which he was awarded the Nobel prize in 1923. In 1921 he left the University of Chicago for the California Institute of Technology at Pasadena, which was sort of a "daughter" of the University of Chicago. The remarkable thing about his experiment is also that ANYONE could then, or could today, perform the same experiment on their kitchen table and verify the same results. Even if their were a man on the Moon or on Mars or any other planet in the Universe, the same experiment could, in principle, be performed and verified, with very limited materials and resources. You did not even need a computer, let alone a fancy one with "chips" which might be bad.
Carl D. Anderson (1905-1991) graduated in physics and engineering from Cal Tech in 1927 and was awarded a Ph.D. in 1930. He was a pupil of Robert Millikan who, at the time, was doing research in cosmic rays, which consist of high energy particles of all energy ranges received at the earth from outer space. Using a Wilson Cloud Chamber, Anderson was able to prove, among other things, the existence of a new particle with the same properties as the electron but opposite charge, which, however was very short lived, and when combined with an electron gave of photons (particle of light). Carl Anderson also was awarded the Nobel prize for this work in 1936. This experiment may be the last one in so called "elementary" particle physics which can be performed by almost anyone on their kitchen table, in principle. It does not require an expensive, fancy, accelerator, not available to all citizens.
This article, written by a former colleague of mine whose office was almost next door at the University of Michigan in the 1960's, makes a number of exaggerated claims about matter and quarks, which are not justified by the scientific knowledge at the present time, and certainly cannot be verified by any observer as the earlier results of Millikan and his pupil Anderson could be so verified.
It is instructive to read earlier textbook accounts of say, the molecule theory, and see how careful scientists of the day were not to make exaggerated claims or promote any particular theory. A good one is the book "Physics A Textbook for College Students" by professor Oscar M. Stewart, formerly of the University of Missouri, Ginn & Co., N.Y., 1924, fourth printing, 1944, pages 188-189, reviewed by Robert Millikan.
While the author and his cronies in the orthodoxy may be convinced of the extence of quarks, the evidence for them is in no way comparable to the massive scientific evidence of the molecular theory of matter, at least some of which can be verified by any person anywhere at almost any time with their own very limited resources. No access to multi billion dollar machines with multi billion dollar computer systems with multi million dollar scientific staffs are necessary, not to mention that while many efforts have been made to observe them over the years, no quark has ever been directly observed, no particles with fractional charge have been observed directly, and no convincing calculation, from first principles, has been performed, calculating all the properties, including mass, of a proton or neutron from 3 or any number of quarks, because even if one could write the correct equations down, the forces are not known and the equations could not be solved exactly or precisely enough to yield an accurate and unique answer.
This situation is not unlike the situation in cancer research. We hear constantly that "breakthroughs" of molecular biology and genetics, also a subject whose results and conclusions are usually far removed from any verification by ordinary persons, are "just around the corner". These statements are especially loud at funding request time in Congress. At least if the physicists who now engage in promotion propaganda for their pet projects, like the cancer generals, are wrong, the only ones who will likely be harmed will be the taxpayers whose hard earned money will be extracted from them involuntarily for these pet projects, however highfalutin they may sound to a gullible and unwitting public, for whom the concept of mass likely remains as much a mystery after reading this article as before, to the small number of those likely reading the article. But if the cancer generals are wrong, as they have been for over 30 years, in both dead end research, fraudulent research, and unscientificly based research, ignoring and obstructing much seminal earlier work like that of Otto Warburg, M.D., Ph.D., this leads to much human suffering and death in addition to waste of taxpayers money.
But I am sure this is just a case of "unintended consequences" with the good and honest physicist who wrote this article, and the "Scientific" American which published it.
Posted by: Winfield J. Abbe | Jul 1, 2005 12:32:22 PM
Post a comment