Quote:
Originally Posted by dleviwing  Muthu;
I find it hard to believe you do not know the meaning of “MASS”. If you move an atom to the far reaches of space away from any significant influence of gravitational forces, the atom would still have the same mass as it did while on the Earth. Mass is based on the inertia property of matter and not on the influence of gravitational phenomena. I think you may be confusing the mass of an object with the weight of an object. If this is so, then I can assume your degree is not in a field of engineering that requires you to acquire a solid understanding of physics. You may wish to refer to my blog “Toronics” and “The Toronic Paradigm” entry; it explains mass in terms of “Rest mass”, “Relative mass”, and “Gravitational mass”. The concept of mass IS NOT WRONG; only the interpretation of the numbers and cause is in question.
The rest of your article is also in question since not all planets have a magnetic field. You have made several errors that a basic physics text book would correct for you.
Regards;
David |
hello,david
i am mainly talking about, nuclear mass the mass or weight of the nucleus proper;but it is often called the atomic mass or atomic weight which would rather mean the mass or weight of the whole atom.
ok,why did not electrons have mass or nearly mass less
did you know the answer ?, but i have given the answer for this
question in my article.
regards
muthu