Article View: sci.physics.fusion
Article #1171Re: Implications of hypothesis of subground states
From: Stephen F. Schaffner
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 18:15
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 18:15
29 lines
2472 bytes
2472 bytes
In article <1993Jan25.044246.16642@zip.eecs.umich.edu>, monkey@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Monkey King) writes: |> Here is a physics question: when an electron in a atom radiates, which |> particle loses mass -- the electron or the nucleus or both? For example, |> suppose a proton and an electron at rest, initially unbound, the total mass |> is M = Mp + Me, where Mp and Me are rest mass of the particles, respectively. |> The electron then combines with the proton to form a hydrogen atom in the |> ground state, losing 13.6 eV in the form of radiation. The total mass of the |> two particles is now M - 13.6 eV. Now the question is which particle is |> lighter than before? And why? Can you say here that you can't ask such a |> question because you have to treat the atom as a single entity? This |> quesiton is relevant to Bollinger's argument about the electron becoming |> lighter and lighter when it falls thru the basement to become a hydrino. I |> hope experts in this group can give a serious answer to my question (Blue, |> Carr, Jones, are you listening?). Even though I am not one of the above mentioned . . . the correct answer is that neither loses mass. The rest mass of the system in its initial state is M. The rest mass of the final state (hydrogen + photon(s)) is also M (conservation of rest mass is guarenteed by the seperate conservation of momentum and energy); the rest mass of the hydrogen atom is smaller than that of the system as a whole. The masses of the electron and proton do not change (unless of course they decay, which would be novel). -- Steve Schaffner sschaff@unixhub.slac.stanford.edu The opinions expressed may be mine, and may not be those of SLAC, Stanford University, or the DOE.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<C1F9Eo.n2M@unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gatech!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!mp.cs.niu.edu!fnnews.fnal.gov!unixhub!roc.SLAC.Stanford.EDU!sschaffReferences:
<1993Jan22.203403.1148@asl.dl.nec.com> <1993Jan24.085220.17739@coplex.com> <1993Jan25.011105.16977@ns.network.com> <1993Jan25.044246.16642@zip.eecs.umich.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gatech!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!mp.cs.niu.edu!fnnews.fnal.gov!unixhub!roc.SLAC.Stanford.EDU!sschaff From: sschaff@roc.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Stephen F. Schaffner) Subject: Re: Implications of hypothesis of subground states Message-ID: <C1F9Eo.n2M@unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU> Sender: news@unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center References: <1993Jan22.203403.1148@asl.dl.nec.com> <1993Jan24.085220.17739@coplex.com> <1993Jan25.011105.16977@ns.network.com> <1993Jan25.044246.16642@zip.eecs.umich.edu> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 18:15:59 GMT Lines: 29