Charge Conservation & Mass-Energy Equivalence

In summary, according to the Mass-Energy equivalence principle, the mass of an electron cannot be converted into energy. The only way for this to happen is through the collision with a positron, resulting in the release of photons and a total charge of zero. This idea of mass being converted into energy is a common misconception, as mass and energy are both conserved in any reaction. The alternate definition of mass as the total 4-momentum of all particles in a system also supports this conservation. It is also important to note that in particle reactions, both energy and momentum must be conserved.
  • #1
Lokesh Sharma
1
0
What will happen to charge on electron if eletron's mass is converted to energy according to Mass-Energy equivalence principle. Would the charge on electron be conserved? If yes, then were would it go as there is no mass now.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #3
jedishrfu said:
I think the only way this would happen is by collision with a positron resulting in the release of photons and total charge being zero.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron–positron_annihilation

That's correct. I'd like to comment on your statement mass is converted to energy. This is a very common but very inaccurate statement. It was pointed out a very long time ago that such a conversion is wrong. It was published as A Relativistic Misconception by Roland Eddy, Science, Sept. 1946. pgs 303. A more recent article is Does nature convert mass into energy?, Ralph Baiellein, Am. J. Phys. 75(4), April 2007

Mass is never converted to energy since both mass and energy are conserved in any reacion. The only think that is not conserved is the sum of the proper masses of the particles in the system. Mass-energy conversion can, at best, only refer to the form in which mass and energy takes. For example; an electron can annihilate a positron with resulting in two photons. The mass to begin with is m and the mass which results is also m. The resulting m is a sum of the relativistic masses of the two photons. The conversion which takes place is that rest energy is converted to kinetic energy. I.e. the initial energy is the sum of kinetic energy and rest energy. The energy after annihilation is all kinetic energy.

If you prefer not to think in terms of relativistic mass then it doesn’t matter because the alternate definition of the mass of a system of particles is the magnitude of total 4-momentum of all the particles in the system. That too is constant in time as well as being an invariant quantity.

One last comment: When considering particle reactions keep in mind that its both energy and momentum must be conserved. That's why you can't have a particle with no charge suddenly change into a single photon. Think of this from the initial rest frame of the particle. The total momentum is zero. If it decay ed into a single photon then since a single photon has momentum, the law of conservation of momentum would be violated.
 
Last edited:
  • #4
Popper said:
That's correct. I'd like to comment on your statement mass is converted to energy. This is a very common but very inaccurate statement. It was pointed out a very long time ago that such a conversion is wrong. It was published as A Relativistic Misconception by Roland Eddy, Science, Sept. 1946. pgs 303. A more recent article is Does nature convert mass into energy?, Ralph Baiellein, Am. J. Phys. 75(4), April 2007

I don't have access to the first article, but reading the second, it seems very silly to me. Their argument seems to boil down to a claim that "rest energy" is not the same thing as mass. It was only a quick read, but I did not see where they describe what they think mass "actually" is.

One can go around claiming that mass "doesn't exist" and that it is all just QCD binding energy, or Higgs field interactions or whatever, but as definitions go "mass"="rest energy" is a perfectly good one. So to me that paper is silly word games. I will concede that the OP's phrase "mass is converted into energy" can be troublesome since by "energy" here what is really mean is "kinetic energy", not "total energy". Maybe that was the thrust of the article, but it wasn't obviously the case to me.

As for your post, all this talk of "relativistic mass" is also not very helpful I think. I agree strongly with this article on that subject: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/pdf/10.1142/9789812814128_0003

As for the OP, jedishrfu basically covered it. Electrons cannot just vanish, leaving behind a "disembodied" unit of charge. To "convert their mass into energy", as it were, you need to destroy them with something, and actually only a positron can do this. Actually that is not totally true, a weak interaction could convert said electron into a neutrino, but other charged particles would be involved such that electric charge is still conserved.
 
Last edited:

Related to Charge Conservation & Mass-Energy Equivalence

1. What is charge conservation?

Charge conservation is a fundamental principle in physics that states that the total electric charge of an isolated system remains constant over time. This means that the amount of positive charge in a system must equal the amount of negative charge, and that charge cannot be created or destroyed.

2. How is charge conserved in nuclear reactions?

In nuclear reactions, charge conservation is maintained by the conversion of particles with opposite charges. For example, in beta decay, a neutron (with no charge) decays into a proton (with a positive charge) and an electron (with a negative charge). This maintains the overall charge of the system.

3. What is the relationship between mass and energy?

According to Einstein's famous equation, E=mc^2, mass and energy are equivalent and can be converted into one another. This means that mass can be converted into energy, and vice versa.

4. How does mass-energy equivalence relate to nuclear reactions?

In nuclear reactions, a small amount of mass is converted into a large amount of energy. This is due to the large binding energy of the nucleus, which is the energy that holds the protons and neutrons together. When a nucleus undergoes a nuclear reaction, a small amount of mass is converted into this binding energy, resulting in a release of a large amount of energy.

5. Is mass-energy equivalence only applicable in nuclear reactions?

No, mass-energy equivalence applies to any system where there is a conversion between mass and energy. This can include chemical reactions, where a small amount of mass is converted into energy, and even in everyday situations such as burning wood, where a small amount of mass is converted into heat and light energy.

Similar threads

  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
8
Views
366
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
16
Views
694
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
765
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
6
Views
1K
Back
Top