Heat Increases Mass

Bob de Hilster asks:

On page 139 of your book you state that increased heat causes increased mass.
Can you give me a specific reference that explains this?

Thanks for the question Bob.

The reference to that is in the classic text:

Lewis, G.N., and Randall, M., 1923, Thermodynamics and the free energy of chemical substances: New York, McGraw-Hill, 653 p. (see pages 48-50)

It may not be in the 2nd edition (probably because of the influence of the Einsteinian Regression): 

Lewis, G.N., and Randall, M., 1961, Thermodynamics (2nd edition of Thermodynamics and the free energy of chemical substances, revised by K.S. Pitzer and Leo Brewer): New York, McGraw-Hill, 723 p.

The transfer of heat motion from supermicrocosms in the macrocosm to the submicrocosms in the microcosm causes mass increase.  This is the reverse of the mass decrease described by E=mc2.  In that case, some of the submicrocosmic motion is transferred to the macrocosm via acceleration of ether particles (the supermicrocosms of interest).  As I showed in my E=mc2 paper (http://scientificphilosophy.com/Downloads/The%20Physical%20Meaning%20of%20E%20=%20mc2.pdf), this is not the usual disappearance of mass into “pure energy” or matterless motion as taught in modern physics, but the transfer of one kind of the motion of matter into another kind of the motion of matter.

One way of viewing this is to realize that the common definition of mass is the resistance to motion within a gravitational field.  Each submicrocosm within a microcosm has motion described by the momentum equation (P=mv).  Any acceleration of those submicrocosms via cross-boundary impacts increases their motion and results in an increase in the calculation for momentum.  Impacts against the inside walls of the microcosm (a tea kettle, for instance) then occur with what we conceive as increased momenta.  This becomes most obvious when you touch the side of a hot kettle.  Measurements of mass generally use gravitation (F=mg), in which ether particles or some such push against the kettle.  The newly accelerated submicrocosms within the kettle push back harder than when they are cold.  Thus, this increased internal momentum is seen by the measuring device as an increase in mass.  In other words, the number of submicrocosms within the microcosm has not increased, only their activity, since we haven’t added any submicrocosms to the kettle.

All this gets deeply into philosophical questions such as the one about what is matter? The above is guided by the 4th Assumption of Science, inseparability (Just as there is no motion without matter, so there is no matter without motion).  Thus if matter had no motion, it would disappear.  Since time is the motion of matter, it would be senseless to presume that there could be time without matter.  My definition of matter is “that which contains other matter and is surrounded by other matter.”  This also follows from the 8th Assumption of Science, infinity (The universe is infinite, both in the microcosmic and macrocosmic directions), which is required to remove the deficiencies of classical mechanics. 

In classical mechanics, we tended to assume that mass is something unchangeable and independent of its environment.  Neomechanics, on the other hand, teaches that mass, like matter, is dependent on its univironment (the matter in motion inside and the matter in motion outside). That is the way the universe is. The outside of a thing is just as important as the insides of a thing. Without infinity the universe would never work. The unchanging finite particles of the atomists and the empty space of Einstein could never make a universe.        

No comments: