🚀 go-pugleaf

Fred McGalliard wrote:
> 
> Chris Muffett
> >     There is a cosmological theory that suggests that neutrinos do have
> > a very small mass, and because there are so many of them in the
> > Universe, this could account for the discrepancy in the mass of the
> > Universe. This discrepancy is known as "hidden mass" or "dark matter"
> > and is responsible for about 90% of the Universe's mass.
> >
> >     The difference between "rest mass" and "real" (inertial or
> > gravitational) mass becomes important when considering particles that
> > travel at relativistic speeds (speeds approaching 1.0c). For example,
> > the rest mass of a photon is zero, but actual mass of a moving photon
> > will not be zero. Gravitational effects must always consider the real
> > mass, not the rest mass. Rest mass is simply a theoretical value used by
> > particle physicists.
> >
> >     I'd like to know whether this has cleared up any of the questions
> > you have.
> 
> Clarafied but even more confused. If a neutrino has 400 keV, after
> climbing out of the emitting gravity well, how can it mater for purposes
> of calculating gravitational force, whether it has any or all of that
> energy in rest mass? And as an interesting aside, just exactly where is
> the energy, (for purposes of finding the mass and the gravitational
> force), that is lost by the objects emitted from deep gravity wells? I
> think that you said that the photon inertial mass is simple
> gravitational mass, at least under certain conditions. Is there
> something special about having a little rest mass that I am missing?


It could be worth having a look at The Big Bang Never Happened.
Have a look at     http://nowscape.com/big-bang.htm

I found it very interesting, well argued and, above all, doesn't rely on
untestable things like Dark Matter.  

Kent