# Thread: lambda to electron volts, can it be done?

1. I would like to know if and how the the question implied by the following sequence can be answered:

Assumption: space is permeated with energy = Energy (E)

Matter = energy that has been converted to mass (m)

Conversion ratio = speed of light squared (c^2)

Space has volume and energy, matter has mass, energy and volume

Assumption: The volume of space can be converted to mass.

Space at average energy density = E = ~ 10^-29g/cm^3 (lambda)

A tiny particle may have mass of ~ 7x10^-17 eV (possible mass of a photon in electron volts)

What is the volume of space at energy density of 10^-29g/cm^3 that is required to provide the energy equivalent to a mass of 7x10^-17 eV?  2.

3. Just in case, does this look right?

The mass equivalent of "7x10^-17 eV" is ~1.2 x 10-52 kg, or ~1.2 x 10-49 g. At "10^-29g/cm^3", you would need ~1 x 10-26 cc of space for this mass.

Someone else gave me this answer and didn't give me the steps to get to it. If it looks right, can you show me the steps to arrive at it?  4. If thats a photon it's got one hell of a wavelength whats that like a 20Hz photon

E = gamma*m*c^2 = 1.2*10^-52*299799245 = 1.07855505*10^-35

E = h*f f = E/h = 1.62*10^-2 or 1/72 Hz oops I was off  5. Since matter is energy, mass is energy and energy is still mass. It is just that we experience light and mass differently. It's the same thing.  6. Originally Posted by Beky
If thats a photon it's got one hell of a wavelength whats that like a 20Hz photon
Ok, its the last photon out of the box.
E = gamma*m*c^2 = 1.2*10^-52*299799245 = 1.07855505*10^-35

E = h*f f = E/h = 1.62*10^-2 or 1/72 Hz oops I was off
Is this showing me the steps that lead to the answer that I posted (that someone else gave me)?

If you are trying to help you should know that I have a brain tumor or something that keeps me from understanding the conversion steps. It is OK to use a lot of words to explain the steps. Why is "gamma" in the formula? What is h, f?

The volume of space at average energy density of space is equivalent to the mass of the tiny particle in eV, i.e. you would need ~1 x 10-26 cc of space for this mass.

Given the average energy density of space = E = ~ 10^-29g/cm^3, what are the steps to arrive at the ~1 x 10-26 cc of space for this mass.

Actually I am trying to make a relationship between the volume of space at average energy density, to some given mass. For example a gram of mass is equivalent to what volume of space? I think I can get the relationship from the OP quantities for the tiny mass I selected, but is there an overall relationship that can be used to convert any given mass to a volume of space (at average energy density)?  7. Gamma is the Lorentz special relativity factor all that means is if it = 1 your travelling at the speed of light if it = 0 your not moving at all(all mass at rest vs all energy at speed of light(or close to but thats an argument for me and L.E.A.P.))

f is frequency and h is plancks constant

and those are the equations (steps) that yor friend left out with the exception of converting to cc

convert to grams then divide by your avg density/cc  8. Originally Posted by Beky
Gamma is the Lorentz special relativity factor all that means is if it = 1 your travelling at the speed of light if it = 0 your not moving at all(all mass at rest vs all energy at speed of light(or close to but thats an argument for me and L.E.A.P.))

f is frequency and h is plancks constant

and those are the equations (steps) that yor friend left out with the exception of converting to cc

convert to grams then divide by your avg density/cc
Thank you Beky. I'm going to print this out and try to get it.

What is the argument between you and L.E.A.P.?  9. I say that photons have mass however negligeable he says they don't.  10. Originally Posted by Beky
I say that photons have mass however negligeable he says they don't.
I say you are right.

Now if you could only prove it. I have a theory that I will let you in on before too long. If my idea (theory is too kind) is correct, they do have mass.  11. on some point they must have mass, but in other theories they shouldn't have mass. It's a discussion. Can't be proven 100% true..  12. There's also a lot to understand before one can even truely make an opinion. Relativity isn't only founded on E = mc^2, nobody seems to look beyobd this and at the rest. This is usually a good indication of how much time one has spent on particle physics.

Electrons gain mass as they accelerate towards the speed of light in a particle accelerator. This is the current argument proving special relativity but how many people honestly know what that means?  Bookmarks
 Posting Permissions
 You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts   BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On [VIDEO] code is On HTML code is Off Trackbacks are Off Pingbacks are Off Refbacks are On Terms of Use Agreement