Mass
It appears the general scientific consensus is: the mass of a body of matter__ is its resistance to any change of state, or motion...
This means that when pressure is brought to bear on an idle body of matter... the tendency is for the pressured body to move away from this pressure, but the pressed body, offers pressure resistance, against having to move. When a body is in motion, this motion is the state it is in, but only in the direction it is moving and the direction it came from... It has no motion going sideways. A bullet fired from a gun has increased mass, resistance against being stopped... but it is not moving sideways (however it and its frame of reference are probably, moving in another direction, and there is a downward direction due to gravity). Perpendicular from the side of a fired bullet... it is still the same mass, as when it was prior to being shot. What I have not ever read or heard... is that the bullet, or any moving body, has minus mass in the direction it came from.
However this just does not seem to be the rest of the story. So I am going to try to put this topic to rest.
First, mass is a measure of the resistance of a body of matter to change of state. It is not the matter changing state, the cause of the change of state, the cause of the resistance, or is it a real physical entity. Mass is the name we gave to a measurement, of real actions of the Universe, that were happening long before we ever decided to measure the actions, and name them. The Universe was functioning quite normally prior to our measurements, and would probably get along without them again should we abandon the measurement of mass.
Second, it is pretty certain that all the matter in the Universe is in motion. It should be explained that when we say some body of matter is at rest mass, sitting still, it is only in the frame of reference we are in with said same body. While riding in a moving vehicle, if you are holding a coin in your palm of your hand; it is idle, with respect to you and the vehicle. It is moving with respect to the surroundings outside the vehicle. If you flip the coin up and let it fall into your hand, it is just as if you were standing on the corner. Stretch your thoughts a bit... what if you were observed from outside the Milky Way galaxy? You and your coin are going lickety split... thousands of miles per hour. This is something to think about if your are going along in Space at 20 mph less than light speed. Since there may be very little gravity in you spaceship you cannot flip a coin with the same results as on Earth, but if you put the coin in the palm of your hand, it would go right along with you.
Going with this outer Space thing a bit more... it would seem that there could be the possibility, a far distant galaxy may be racing along just a few miles per hour less that the speed of light?! There might even be a civilization there on a planet. If we go with Einstein's Theories__ these people may be in grave danger of being converted to radiant atomic nuclear electromagnetic phenomena! Wham, Boom, Poof! But, Probably not, I think it requires infinite force, on an infinite mass, to reach the speed of light in free space. Would, or could they measure mass the same as we do? There mass probably would be much like ours when relative to the galaxy they are in. However, their whole galaxy should have more directional mass since it it traveling overall faster through Space.
Third, if a body, as a boat, moves through water... the resistance increases requiring more work to push the boat through the water, the faster we go. If a body, as an airplane, flies through the air... the resistance increases requiring more work to push the airplane through the air, the faster we go. If a body, such as a particle, moves through outer Space... the resistance increases requiring more work to push the particle through outer Space, the faster it goes. In all three scenarios we can say the measurement of the mass, resistance to change of state, of the body has increased. It obviously takes more work to push a body faster, faster, and faster...! Ah, but here is The Rub__ for the boat and the airplane the increased resistance was blamed on the water and the air. The increased resistance of the particle in Space... is just blamed on the increases mass measurement of the body as if the body has grown, or taken on some additional attributes! As far as I know, science does not blame it on outer Space, or take the chance to think... the resistance might be Space itself! This conclusion is due to the thought that Space has no physical attributes we can readily measure; to offer resistance to the motion of a body moving through it! I believe the Jury is still out on this one! I, agree with others of science, that Space is not matter, in our physical forms, so to speak. But, it does have electromagnetic phenomena... light as photons, and possibly what we call fields. There may be idle mass-less matter in Space. We can even measure values of electromagnetic radiation in different field locations... such as visible light, radio, and etc. Hum?
You know, all above three scenarios of resistance; still may be alike, if thought of differently. The boat and the airplane must go through matter as water and matter as air, both types of matter also containing inner and intermediate Space. The particle mentioned above, moving in a partial vacuum Space, has very little matter in and about it, but has much electromagnetic light as visible, heat, x-ray and etc... As near as I can understand, photons of light come from virtual existence of inner space of atoms when electrons drop to a lower energy level. This is also probably where they go when they are absorbed into a body of atoms. They may go into what science calls a virtual state. I call this idle photons, or photons that are not moving enough to have any significantly amount of directional mass, thus making them relatively undetectable, or invisible so to speak. However, this idle condition may just be undetectable and indivisible just with reference to the local frame of reference... Thus, there is inner and intermediate Space with water and air to give some reverse resistance to motion of a body. And finally there is Space without matter but with active light photons to give some reverse resistance to motion of a body. This might put things in common perspective, or at least food for thought? Can a photon be idle you ask? Well, I am not sure because, they would be hard to detect, but we know light can travel slower through various mediums, than at light speed through outer Space. (However this slowing of light might have other explanations, whereas the photon may have the same speed, but has more distance to travel finding it way through a medium...?)
Forth, when a body of matter in a common frame of reference is sitting still, idle, it is said to have an at rest mass, or be at rest mass. If this body were in Space, void of gravitation, (yeah I know, never, truly), we would have approximately the same amount of resistance if we tried to push the body from any direction. Going back to the spaceship in deep space, a billiard ball would float inside the cabin. It could be pushed from any direction with pretty much the same effects. This is about the same for the spaceship itself if at a very high speed of approximately uniform motion... if going along outside the ship... the force required to push the ship, likewise would be about the same from any direction. The ship in its frame of reference would remain at it at rest mass. However, we know its mass is increased, having been accelerated to a high velocity in one direction... and this high directional mass would definitely be evident if it collided with an asteroid that was not going along in the same frame of reference!
For the value of mass measurement for a body of matter that has been accelerated to a high rate through Space, a formula by Lorentz is used... This formula uses the term velocity (more explanation other places). Velocity is defined such, that it is required to have only a single direction. Twenty miles per hour north for a simple example. And, it is only common sense, that in the direction a body is moving, is the direction that would have the increased resistance. Easy! Well, not so easy. A body retains its at rest mass__ if it is forced in a direction perpendicular anywhere girding 360° of the body. And, further common sense would seem to lead us to the conclusion: if the spaceship just hit the afore mentioned asteroid a glancing blow, the collision would not have been the full onslaught of the directional mass. This means the directional mass of an accelerated body is less at an angle, than from directly forward in the direction of the accelerated velocity. And, we know, as said, when halfway back, at a 90° angle, the body is at rest mass. What do you suppose the mass will be from halfway back to directly astern? Going with this___ wouldn't it still becoming less? It is written that at the speed of light, a body would have infinite mass... This is what I call directional mass, and only infinite in the forward direction of motion. I go with the reasoning that any body will have increased mass in the direction it is moving, or changing state, whether through air, water, or Space. A hammer just tapping your finger is one thing, but a hammer slammed down on your finger is another matter. A peen pun maybe? I would hazard a guess that at the speed of light, using Lorentz's formula in reverse would give us a negative zero mass, or infinitesimal mass in the reverse direction for the same body at light speed. Thus if mass is a resistance scenario dealing in pressure__ there would be an infinite pressure differential across the body from the forward bow to the reverse stern. Thus if directional forward mass is positive... then directional reverse mass should be negative. Then all that is left to do, is a little mathematical manipulation upon the Lorentz formula__ This sort of gives a person a feel, for how strongly an atom is held together... The pressure force that a hammer has when it is headed toward driving a nail is calculated by classical physics, of rate of speed in the direction of the blow, area of contact, and the time duration of impact... In the extreme... there is also some very tiny amount of resistance to the forward swing motion of a hammer exerted by Space. And, some from the air it is passing thru... but for this classical physics, it is minimal to say the least.
Directional Forward Mass........... + mf = mo / + [ √ ( 1- vē / cē ) ]
Directional Reverse Mass............ - mr = mo / - [ √ (1 - vē / cē ) ]
Please note here: I continually refer to the above formulae as Lorentz's. The configuration of the mathematical formula came from Lorentz. Using this formula for calculating measure of mass is a product of Einstein. What Einstein did here was awesome, but if I mention Einstein's formula... people usually mentally jump to his other more famous equation. However this formula may be just as important as his most famous one.
It seems a bit silly to have reverse mass. But, you probably will admit, the further away a body goes, the less chance of impacting yourself in a given time. But, that is not why I went through this exercise of reasoning... We know that behind a racing car there is a reduced pressure region. There is a lot we don't know about Space. But, we have pretty well established that light is curved as it passes large bodies of matter. (I go with the thought that Space is curved, or warped in some manner, and light follows this curvature. I do not think gravitational radiation, if such a thing, directly affects light.) So, there may be a distortion in Space in front of a moving body, as well as distortion behind?! Might this be observable? I don't know, but if so, we would gain a bit more knowledge of Space. There is the Cerenkov Effect of a light cone preceding accelerated particles when going through a medium that allows the particle to move through the medium faster than light through the same media. Maybe there is an effect on light in the wake of a high velocity particle? And__ it might even be that we only travel through Space of our own, that is maybe like a Space bubble, giving us a solar system frame of reference including Space that moves with us. This would or could, also go further to have other Space envelope frame of references; as for other bodies as stars, and galaxies.
There is one last item I conjured up. If the electrons have motion within the atom as thought... and they travel in some motions in an inner Space... and if they move fairly rapidly... it would seem that they would have some minute value of directional mass for each electron. Then, it would seem that with the billions plus atoms that can make up a body would have maybe trillions of electrons, all with directional mass, probably going in all sorts of directions. I then have to wonder__ is this what gives any and all bodies their mass, we call at rest mass? Since we really don't know how or why a body has mass; resistance to change of state... could this be the answer...? (04-12-2010... I now have more on this as Addendums in Section IV, RAD Commentary.)
~~~~~~~~
Again note... I have mass in the section of my writings as non-reality. The Universe can and could do without the measurement mass, and the word mass, and still function normally. Do not get confused with the actions of bodies of matter. Matter would still move, and run into resistance and etc. It is just not a must, that matter gets its matter measured as mass... and, all daylong, that is what matter is doing without. Mass goes into the fantasy bucket.
* * * *
Page Relevant Quotes
"Moreover mass is not merely 'heaviness' but resistance to change in motion. Einstein's equation giving the increase of mass with velocity is similar in form to the other equations of Relativity but vastly more important in its consequences:
m = mo / √ 1-vē/cē
The Universe and Dr. Einstein; by Lincoln Barnett
"In its popular sense, mass, is just another word for weight. But as used by the physicist, it denotes a rather different and more fundamental property of matter: namely, resistance to a change of motion." Primer on Quantum theory of the Atom, by Stephen k. Lower.
Mass: "A measure of a body's inertia, i.e. its resistance to acceleration." Fm: A Concise Dictionary of Physics.
"As the velocity of a particle approaches the velocity of light, the mass increases (the restricted theory of relativity) so that
m = mo / √(1-vē/cē)
where mo is the mass for zero velocity (rest mass); v is the velocity of the particle, and c is the velocity of light" Encyclopedic Dictionary of Electronics and Nuclear Engineering, by Robert I. Sarbacher, Sc.D.
"The Cerenkov Effect." "The relativity of mass places a limit on the speed that a body can have relative to an observer. As the body's speed v approaches the speed of light c, the ratio vē/cē approaches 1 and the quantity √1-vē/cē approaches 0. Hence the mass m of a body given by m = mo / √(1-vē/cē) approaches infinity as v approaches c. The relative speed v therefore must be less than c. An infinite force would be needed to accelerate a body to a speed at which its mass is infinite, and there are neither infinite forces nor infinite masses in the universe.
The speed of light c in special relativity is the speed of light in free space, 3 x 108 m/sec. in all material media, such as water, glass, or air, visible light travels more slowly than this, and atomic particles are capable of moving with higher speeds in such a media than the the speed of light in them though never faster than the speed of light in free space. When an electrically charged particle moves through a substance at a speed exceeding that of light in the substance, a cone of light waves is emitted in a process roughly similar to that in which a ship produces a bow wave as it moves through the water at a speed greater than that of water waves. These light waves are known as Cerenkov radiation." Fundamentals of Physical Science; Krauskopf & Beiser
"By the formula given by Einstein for the equivalence, the complete destruction of 1 lb of mass would be accompanied by the release of 10.66 billion kwhr of energy." Encyclopedic Dictionary of Electronics and Nuclear Engineering, by Robert I. Sarbacher, Sc.D. (Nope! RAD)
"We should note... ...in the special case in which the force F is perpendicular to the v, as in the deflection of a high-speed particle by a magnetic field, neither the speed nor the mass changes... " Principles of College Physics: George Shortley & Dudley Williams (Important... RAD)
"At Rest Mass: ""Post an observer on a moving body and he will find a standard value, the "rest mass," identical for every electron, the same for every proton, standard for every pint of water, etc."" Fm: Physics For The Inquiring Mind, by Eric M. Rogers (This not true for light photons that only have directional mass, and it also may not be true for individual quarks of matter... RAD)
"The only particle that can move at the velocity of light is the photon itself, due to its zero rest mass." Primer on Quantum theory of the Atom, by Stephen k. Lower. (There is a good chance that individual quarks fall into this category... RAD)
"...laws of motion... The story began with Galileo... Of all his discoveries, the greatest was that a body upon which no outside force is acting will continue in its state of motion; if it is at rest, it will remain at rest, but it will maintain any velocity that it originally has. This is the principal of inertia, the first of the great principles of physics of which the general statement was probably given by his contemporary Rene′ Descartes." Quanta: J. Andrade e Silva, G. Lochak (Note this was Galileo... not Newton... RAD)
"...Aristotle had believed that a force is necessary to maintain continuous motion." Quanta: J. Andrade e Silva, G. Lochak (RAD ...it actually works out that Aristotle was right... if my theories are correct...)
"Newton concluded that the acceleration given to a body by any particular force will be independent of the form, dimensions, and constitution of the body; it will depend entirely upon the amount of matter that the body contains__ in other words, its mass. The fundamental law of dynamics is:
F = mv
where m is the mass of the moving body, F the force acting on it, and γ the acceleration produced. This law shows quite clearly that the only property of the body which is relevant to the study of motion is the mass." Quanta: J. Andrade e Silva, G. Lochak
"In mechanical terms, a body is subject to acceleration if the amount of ground covered in unit time is changing (either increasing, so that the body is accelerating in the usual sense of the word, or else decreasing, so that the body is decelerating or slowing down). The body is also said to be undergoing acceleration if its direction of motion is changing, even if its actual velocity along its trajectory is not." Quanta: J. Andrade e Silva, G. Lochak
"The important fact about mass is that it is a measure of resistance to a change of motion, a property usually called inertia." The world of Elementary Particles, Kenneth W. Ford
"That mass is one of the forms of energy was first realized at the beginning of this century. The energy of mass and the energy of motion are the two forms of energy which dominate the elementary-particle world. Mass energy can be thought of as the 'energy of being,' matter possessing energy just by virtue of existing. A material particle is nothing more than a highly concentrated and localized bundle of energy. The amount of concentrated energy for a motionless particle is proportional to its mass. If the particle is moving it has still more energy, its kinetic energy. A mass-less particle such as a photon has only energy of motion (kinetic energy) and no energy of being (mass)." The world of Elementary Particles, Kenneth W. Ford. (RAD... more motion, mass, work... energy is measured later...) "That mass is one of the forms of energy... Bah!"rad. Matter "matter possessing energy by virtue of existing" matter has the ability to do work, energy, by virtue of it existing, in motion. rad!
"Matter at the center of the earth has mass, but no weight, for the pull of the earth upon it then is in all directions." A Survey of Physics for College Students; Frederick A. Saunders. (pull... bah)