How much do LPs weigh?
- Thread starter granny
- Start date
RandomBastard
Can't get enough of FH
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2003
- Messages
- 1,318
you say mass is a form of energy, but that doesnt imply energy is a form of mass, or that energy has a mass
Doh_boy
Part of the furniture
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2003
- Messages
- 1,007
RandomBastard said:
They are the same thing, engery is mass in another form. By definition it's the same the other way round. The stumbling block is, is energy affected by gravity. Which I've no clue about, vauge memories about seeing light from an eclipse. If light is bent by gravity then electromagnetic radiation is affected by gravity.
:s
Vae
Resident Freddy
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,181
What you are all skirting around is the concept of binding energy which is what is described by E=mc^2
i.e. the mass of an atom is less than the sum of it's constituent particles because some of the mass is converted into energy to hold the particles together. The ratio of the mass lost (delta m aka change in mass) to the energy gained is described by einsteins equation.
Due to the conservation of mass principle in chemical reactions there won't be any change is mass due to the reaction but there could be due to the change in binding energy between the atoms.
I'm not a chemist but looking at the chemical reactions for the discharge of a lead acid battery:
PbO2 + H2SO4 --> PbSO4 + H2O + O and
Pb + H2SO4 --> PbSO4 +2H
Leads me to believe that the final molecules are less complex and therefore will have less binding energy and thus more mass. So a flat battery could be heavier than a charged one.
Disclaimer: This could all be a load of bollocks sine I haven't had anything to do with Physics for 4.5 years.
i.e. the mass of an atom is less than the sum of it's constituent particles because some of the mass is converted into energy to hold the particles together. The ratio of the mass lost (delta m aka change in mass) to the energy gained is described by einsteins equation.
Due to the conservation of mass principle in chemical reactions there won't be any change is mass due to the reaction but there could be due to the change in binding energy between the atoms.
I'm not a chemist but looking at the chemical reactions for the discharge of a lead acid battery:
PbO2 + H2SO4 --> PbSO4 + H2O + O and
Pb + H2SO4 --> PbSO4 +2H
Leads me to believe that the final molecules are less complex and therefore will have less binding energy and thus more mass. So a flat battery could be heavier than a charged one.
Disclaimer: This could all be a load of bollocks sine I haven't had anything to do with Physics for 4.5 years.
Vae
Resident Freddy
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,181
As for gravity effecting light - Yes it does. A gravitational field will affect electromagnetic radiation (light) due to wave particle duality (i.e. light is both a wave and a particle at the same time). This explains effects like the coruna around the moon during a total eclipse since the light is bent around the moon. This is also the principle behind a solar sail. However the mass of the light particles is so tiny it's almost impossible to measure.
xane
Fledgling Freddie
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2003
- Messages
- 1,695
"Energy" cannot exist on it's own, it is an abstract scientific term relating to the result of "work", not some alternative state of a substance that has a physical presence.
To say something "stores energy" as if some kind of fudge existed inside waiting to be poured out is incorrect, energy _is_ a change of state, that's why this kind of energy is called "potential", you still need work to make it happen.
The view of "energy" as some mysterious life force is what pseudo-science uses to make their mumbo-jumbo theories seem plausable.
To say something "stores energy" as if some kind of fudge existed inside waiting to be poured out is incorrect, energy _is_ a change of state, that's why this kind of energy is called "potential", you still need work to make it happen.
The view of "energy" as some mysterious life force is what pseudo-science uses to make their mumbo-jumbo theories seem plausable.
Vae
Resident Freddy
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,181
Ok the corona was probably a bad example.
<Tries to think of another example>
At least one case I can recall is of a star being observed in a certain place in the sky but the light from the star has actually been bent by a black hole and the star is in actuality hidden behind the black hole.
<Tries to think of another example>
At least one case I can recall is of a star being observed in a certain place in the sky but the light from the star has actually been bent by a black hole and the star is in actuality hidden behind the black hole.
leggy
Probably Scottish
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2003
- Messages
- 3,838
Lazarus said:well, I think we have officially entered the "Who gives a fuck" stage of this conversation
We entered that stage at post #3
I was merely being an uninformed, pedantic twat who likes to change his argument 3 times during the course.
granny
Fledgling Freddie
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2003
- Messages
- 253
- Thread starter
- #79
Jesus christ you lot talk a load of bolox sometimes
Anyway, I took a random sample of 10 of my LP's (first 10 i grabbed) and they weighed 2.5 kg so average weight of LP's is prolly around 250g.
Edit: and there's 150 of them, so 37.5 kg or so. Oo. I'll start making the list of them now
Anyway, I took a random sample of 10 of my LP's (first 10 i grabbed) and they weighed 2.5 kg so average weight of LP's is prolly around 250g.
Edit: and there's 150 of them, so 37.5 kg or so. Oo. I'll start making the list of them now
granny
Fledgling Freddie
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2003
- Messages
- 253
- Thread starter
- #80
OK... that took a while
Here's the list (spam alert)
Now, for all I know there could be some rare collectibles in there, some of the Zappa's possibly, I dunno. Should do some research I suppose.
Damn, typing that list in brought back a shedload of memories too. Gonna be really hard to part with a lot of those! But I'm badly in need of some cash atm, I can't see myself ever getting a turntable... arf, dunno what to do :/
Here's the list (spam alert)
Now, for all I know there could be some rare collectibles in there, some of the Zappa's possibly, I dunno. Should do some research I suppose.
Damn, typing that list in brought back a shedload of memories too. Gonna be really hard to part with a lot of those! But I'm badly in need of some cash atm, I can't see myself ever getting a turntable... arf, dunno what to do :/
granny
Fledgling Freddie
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2003
- Messages
- 253
- Thread starter
- #82
Tom said:
A right mixture tbh.
Most of them are in decent condition, the vinyl itself is mostly pretty clean & scratch-free. I tended to only buy albums where the disc itself was good and I looked after them. Unfortunately the sleeves aren't in such good nick. They've been unplayed and left standing about for 15 years or so and the tops of the sleeves have been used as a scratching surface by a bastard cat for a few years so they've almost all got some damage along one edge.
Having a quick browse on ebay some of these are defo worth some money alone... the Beatles, Seargent Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band is an original 1967 mono pressing with all the inserts and everything - a good condition copy of that is at £320 atm with a few days left to go
T
TuBBy
Guest
:eek2: OMG Trashed
granny
Fledgling Freddie
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2003
- Messages
- 253
- Thread starter
- #86
They're not as bad as those photos make them look tbh. The damage is only on the edges and only in 1 place on them. If you were looking at a single LP you'd not think much of it, but all stacked up together like that it looks worse.
Still, bastard cats eh :/ They start off all cute and before you know it they've shat behind the telly, ruined your sofa, murdered your neighbours tropical fish and pissed on the duvet
Still, bastard cats eh :/ They start off all cute and before you know it they've shat behind the telly, ruined your sofa, murdered your neighbours tropical fish and pissed on the duvet
