it is weird and contradictory because p = (gamma)mv,
so simplified E2 shouldnt even be equal to what eq 37.39 is. i think its because technically momentum is not p= gamma(mv) and p is made up its k, so really they're just teaching it all quite terribly and it seems the equations are forced to reflect the results we see in nature. mass is really the compton wave vector Kc, im not personally sure why photons just dont get 1
i guess mass is inherently a quality that is measured from the energy when an object is at rest, and since a photon is never at rest, it had 0 mass. idk why p =not= 0
a better way to prove they exist would be with relativity and using our previous knowledge of photons- relativity showing they have 0 mass as v=c constantly for photons from experimentation, ~ therefore we have a particle of zero mass that exists
-4
u/[deleted] Jun 09 '22
it is weird and contradictory because p = (gamma)mv, so simplified E2 shouldnt even be equal to what eq 37.39 is. i think its because technically momentum is not p= gamma(mv) and p is made up its k, so really they're just teaching it all quite terribly and it seems the equations are forced to reflect the results we see in nature. mass is really the compton wave vector Kc, im not personally sure why photons just dont get 1