At 20:56 28/12/2007, you wrote:
>The short answer, Julian, is that, AFAIK, you don't get massless electric
>charges. (IANAPhysicist)
This is good, and is my understanding too.
This means that when you destroy mass you must either destroy the
charge or conserve it somehow.
>The 'E' in E=mc^2 is independent of the surroundings, and 'E' does
>not carry a charge.
?Is that always so?
>If I remember correctly, if you want to destroy an electric charge
>when converting 'm' to 'E', then under CPT Conservation, that is only
>possible by reversing time, or turning matter into antimatter.
>
>I don't think this answers your question, either.
So is the charge conserved when mass ceases to exist? This conflicts
with the initial understanding we both had.
In any case I'm not entirely sure of how far CPT Conservation or
symmetry is regarded now, see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP_violation and elsewhere.
>I'm sure that there's a real question in there. It's just a little
>difficult winkling it out. Would it be possible to see a just
>little more of your thought process, please.
>
> - Paul
As Douglas Adams (and many others) realized, the formulation of the
question grants more than 50% of the understanding offered by an answer.
I hope there's a real question in there - and GP-UK would deserve
some credit if it ever emerged. Apologies if this sounds like
sophistry to some, FWIW I'm simple enough to believe it.
My interest was triggered by a number of things, but amongst them the
theory that black holes have only 3 features that can be measured,
namely mass, spin and charge. I've left aside spin for the moment
because the same word is used in physics for meanings that may or may
not be related. Also FWIW I don't think in the case of black holes
that the charge issue is in fact negligible in the normal sense.
Julian
|