Science - An Asteroid May Have New Elements Not Known on Earth

More evidence for the elusive 9th planet?

New evidence found for Planet 9

 

In my lifetime this has moved from haha and the stomping ground of pseudoscientists like Sitchin to somewhere between plausible and likely.

 

This will just fuel the Planet X groups who post photos of lens flares and such as evidence that planet X is in our backyard and visible with the naked eye or certain cameras in desolate locations.

 

Assuming everything else stays the same, if the diameter of the asteroid's orbit around the sun was increased would the mass of the asteroid increase, decrease or stay the same, given E = mc² ?

That's a real question.

 

When does mtg claim that's where the Jewish space lasers are from?

 

I mean undoubtedly there are lasers, space, and Jewish people, so it’s just a matter of time.

 

I love this type of science..keep it coming, chemgator. It's all fascinating to me.

 

I want everyone know how smart I am… I know how to use ChatGPT:

If the diameter of the asteroid's orbit around the sun is increased while everything else remains the same, the mass of the asteroid would stay the same. The equation E=mc² relates energy (E) to mass (m) and the speed of light (c), but changing the orbit's diameter doesn't directly affect the asteroid's mass.

 

[/QUOTE]

I should have asked the question differently. What I meant by ",everything else stays the same" is the asteroid doesn't gain or lose any particles/cosmic dust when it's orbit's diameter is increased.

In that case, the temperature of the asteroid would decrease as it got further from the sun. As it's temp drops it's mass would decrease because E = mc². See if ChatGPT can figure out why. Also, an orbit with a wider diameter would require the asteroid to move more slowly which would also cause it's mass to decrease.

ChatGPT believed that Trump called Nazis and white nationalists "fine people" (the Fine People Hoax) until I made it read Trump's actual words. Then ChatGPT apologized for getting it wrong.

 

As I understand it, your basic premise is faulty here. As it's temp drops it's mass would decrease because E = mc². That's not precisely true. The energy of the system may likely change, but the mass would still be invariant. The system would still find equilibrium and lose that differential of energy to velocity or momentum changes.

 

Speaking of electrons...


Why do electrons not fall into the nucleus?

 

I apparently did not pay attention in my physics class…

 

If E = mc² and c² is a constant can we say that energy is proportional to mass?

So if you lower the energy of the asteroid by lowering it's temperature would it's mass not decrease?

Don't objects thatove slower have less energy than if those same objects move faster? So if the asteroid moves slower in an orbit with a greater diameter would it not have less energy and therefore less mass?

If you lower the temperature of a penny doesn't it weigh less?

Just having fun with the thread. Are you a physics PhD?

 

Took physics a looooooonng time ago but weight isn't the same as mass I don't think.

 

I'm not a physics PhD, but an engineer with a keen interest in this kind of stuff.

Your assumption is one of a single object and a single equation with no other variables. Everything is in a system. In this case, you have a moving object so there are variables other than mass and energy. You have temperature, velocity, spin and momentum also contributing significantly to the energy of the system. Systems desire equilibrium so one of those variables will change before the mass of the object would.

That's correct. Weight is mass multipled by the gravitational constant (on Earth it's ~9.8m/s^2).

 

My rocket surgeon brain just asked myself,,, What the hell did I just read? lol

Seriously, these discussions about science intrigue me. That’s one reason I read too hot.
Thanks from a very intellectually average dude.

 

So let:s try this: Suppose you broke off a small piece of the asteroid with a mass of 1 kg and put it in the walkin cooler at your local 7Eleven. A hurricane knocks out the power to the 7Eleven. As the temperature in the cooler rises won''t the mass (and weight) of the asteroid chunk increase (because E = mc² , correct?).

 

I think I see where you're going with this. Boyle's Law will cause an increase in pressure and temperature within the cooler (assuming it's airtight). However, you're definitely starting to exceed my knowledge of this subject. Without delving into the interrelationships between molecules, the short answer is there is a difference between "rest mass" and "relativistic mass".

EDIT: Fortunately, there are people out there much smarter than I am on this subject. This is a pretty good description of the differences between the two.

The Two Definitions of “Mass”, And Why I Use Only One

 

True. You might find DesertGator's response to post #38 interesting