View Single Post
  #11  
Old Thursday, June 01, 2006
maria khan's Avatar
maria khan maria khan is offline
Senior Member
Medal of Appreciation: Awarded to appreciate member's contribution on forum. (Academic and professional achievements do not make you eligible for this medal) - Issue reason:
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Regimented Dojo
Posts: 193
Thanks: 23
Thanked 14 Times in 12 Posts
maria khan is on a distinguished road
Default

Well, my question has really frizzlled serveral minds, I can really smell that. Anyways so here we go towards the exact answer.

The solution is really dementating, which is hidden in the major consequences of "THEORY OF RELATIVITY" so proposed by Einstein, among the subjective results the one which gives the digestible solution of my question is "LENGTH CONTRACTION".

That is, if we are in rest frame of reference then the length of an object which is relative to our fixed frame of reference is supposed to be L', but when that object starts moving with some velocity 'v' then it's new length so observed by the observer who is speculating that rod or object from that fixed frame of reference, will seem to reduced because of Lorentz Factor effect, and thus from L' it will change into L (here we using the respective notations for the sake of our convenience). We can understand this phenomenon by means of following equation, which is,

L= L' ( 1- v^2/c^2 )^1/2
where 'c' is speed of light whose is value is 3x10^8 m/s, plus 'v' is always less than 'c', as if c<v then this thing will create great natural blunder.

Hence length of the rod (object) appears to reduce when there is relative motion between an observer and the rod, provided the relative velocity is comparable (but not eacatly equal) to speed of light.

One thing more which I would like to mention is that, length contraction takes place only along the direction of motion of the body. There is no change in length of the body perpendicular to the direction of its motion.

Hence by visionary point of view LENGTH CONTRACTION is responsible to effect the rigidity of any solid body.

Another thing which is very indespensible to highlight is that, here WE are not applying any sort of force personally on the frame of references, we are merely observers in this case.

So I think this thing shall now satisfy ur minds.


As far as Mr.Ghayas said that heat is the agent that could effect the rigidity, so in this ragards I would like to rectify that no doubt heat is an energy form but it is produced due to collision of atoms and molecules, and there is no objection in this fact that its only force that makes atome to collide and repel, so when there'll be no force then there'll be no friction, and once there won't be any friction how can heat be produced? Thus if heat is involved it means there is the contribution of some force. Hence the answer is valid.

And whatelse angelfalls said in this concern, also not accurate, as voltage is basically workdone per unit charge, and work is the scaler product of force and displacement. So once there won't be any force then there won't be any work done, and when there isn't any workdone by any charge then how could this voltage or potantial difference be produced?

Thus both these terms which are energy and heat are goverened by force, hence they are not of true match of my question.

Beyond doubt, u guys have definitely made encouraging attempts. I'm delighted.

So long then.

ALLAH PE AMAN.
__________________
Farangi teyra chehra do rangi,,,A'ankhein roshan dil zangi.
Reply With Quote