Possibly Silly Question

On earth, as we convert mass to energy, the earth loses mass, correct? And
if so, are we not reducing the earth's gravity, if even just a bit?

BV.

Benign Vanilla wrote:
On earth, as we convert mass to energy, the earth loses mass, correct? And
if so, are we not reducing the earth's gravity, if even just a bit?

BV.



America is converting energy into hamburgers and giant gas guzzling
SUV's which is actually increasing mass.

Benign Vanilla wrote
On earth, as we convert mass to energy, the earth loses mass, correct? And
if so, are we not reducing the earth's gravity, if even just a bit?

BV.


IMHO, Maybe a bit, but an immeasurable bit! Local temporary decreases in
entropy, e.g. life and it's fiddling about on the skin of this planet,
are less than trivial compared to the net gain in mass from hoovering up
particles from space.
I think I read somewhere that Earth picks up around 600 tons from space
each year, (seems low to me), so that's roughly, assuming a constant
rate for the sake of simplicity, 6*10E10 tons since the solar system
began to settle down. If we'd converted even a tiny fraction of that
kind of mass to energy, we wouldn't be here :-)

Denis
--
DT
Replace nospam with the antithesis of hills

Wow another Gene an mad scientist.
BP
"john henry bonham" wrote in message
.. .
Benign Vanilla wrote:
On earth, as we convert mass to energy, the earth loses mass, correct?
And
if so, are we not reducing the earth's gravity, if even just a bit?

BV.



America is converting energy into hamburgers and giant gas guzzling SUV's
which is actually increasing mass.

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 14:11:25 +0100, Benign Vanilla wrote:

On earth, as we convert mass to energy, the earth loses mass, correct?
And if so, are we not reducing the earth's gravity, if even just a bit?

Chemical reaction does not change mass to energy, it only releases stored
energy. So most of the energy production do not affect overall mass of the
system. Nuclear energy does convert mass to energy but that energy mostly
remains trapped within the earth including its atmosphere. Some mass is
gained by the earth in form of cosmic dust which is raining down all the
time. Some mass is also lost from the highest level of the atmosphere in
the form of free hydrogen.

--

Gautam Majumdar

Please send e-mails to

"Benign Vanilla" schreef in bericht
...
On earth, as we convert mass to energy, the earth loses mass, correct? And
if so, are we not reducing the earth's gravity, if even just a bit?

BV.


The gravity of the earth won't change as long as the energy (in whatever
form) stays "on earth".
Gravity is a result of energy. Since mass has alot of energy (E=mc^2), most
of the gravitation comes from the energy in mass.

"Gautam Majumdar" wrote in message
. uk...
On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 14:11:25 +0100, Benign Vanilla wrote:

On earth, as we convert mass to energy, the earth loses mass, correct?
And if so, are we not reducing the earth's gravity, if even just a bit?

Chemical reaction does not change mass to energy, it only releases stored
energy. So most of the energy production do not affect overall mass of the
system. Nuclear energy does convert mass to energy but that energy mostly
remains trapped within the earth including its atmosphere.


Absolute crap.

The "conversion of mass into energy" that occurs when (say) a 1 megaton
nuclear bomb is exploded is exactly the same as the conversion of mass into
energy that occurs when 1 million tons of TNT is exploded.

The loss of mass in the waste products of a 600 Megawatt coal power station
is exactly the same as the loss of mass in the waste products of a 660
Megawatt nuclear power station.

There is no qualitative difference between nuclear and chemical reactions
with respect to conversion of mass into energy. You get 1 Joule of energy
out, the waste products of that reaction (when cooled) will weigh
1/(3*10^8)^2 grams less than the original material - be it Uranium, Coal or
anything else.

Indeed, the nett change of weight of a nuclear explosion occuring in a
sealed container is zero. Whilst the rest mass of the decay products is
less, because they are hotter after the explosion the atome are moving
faster and so have a relativistic mass increase which EXACTLY brings their
mass up to what they were before. The loss of mass is only evident in the
cooled reaction products (and, again, is the same for chemical and nuclear
reactions). If you treat the Earth as the "sealed container", neither
chemical nor nuclear reactions affect the Earth's mass.

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 09:11:25 -0400, Benign Vanilla wrote:

On earth, as we convert mass to energy, the earth loses mass, correct? And
if so, are we not reducing the earth's gravity, if even just a bit?

Far more mass is added constantly by colliding dust and micrometeorites,
than is lost with fission and fusion.


--
- Mike

Remove 'spambegone.net' and reverse to send e-mail.

"Benign Vanilla" wrote in
:

On earth, as we convert mass to energy, the earth loses mass, correct?
And if so, are we not reducing the earth's gravity, if even just a bit?

Don't forget that the influx of solar energy adds to the mass of the
Earth.

--
Steve Gray

hehehe, what an interesting concept
one that had not occurred to me, anyway.
i don't think there is any process which is 100% efficient, ie, you can't a
given mass and convert it all, totally, completely, 100% into energy.
it's all "recycling", eg the water you drink has been naturally recycled
from the sea, yak-****, Napoleon Bonaparte's arse, etc
things just change from stuff to other stuff.
cool name btw, wish i'd thought of it first

"Benign Vanilla" wrote in message
...
On earth, as we convert mass to energy, the earth loses mass, correct? And
if so, are we not reducing the earth's gravity, if even just a bit?

BV.