My Oxford University special relativity lecturer just wrote this on the board 1 minute ago

my Oxford University special relativity lecturer just wrote this on the board 1 minute ago

what the fuck

isnt this complete bullshit?

No, why is that bullshit?
Gamma goes to infinity as v goes to c.

its undefined, she never said she was taking the limit

but that aside, then she says that we set rest mass to zero so that 0 × infinity = a fixed finite E

is that allowed?

It's not a great explanation, but it's basically a way to say that only massless particles can travel at c, which is true.

He probably just tries to justify it by appealing to intuition. But to prove this, you should really take two limits.

>is that allowed?
it's not that it's allowed, brainlet, it's that it's the only value that will allow for a finite limit

how are limits realized in nature? Like, how does nature know to assign the limit of an expression to the energy?

We're the only one here taking a limit. I don't think you understand what written on the blackboard. Your professor here isn't calculating the value of E based on a limit, he is showing that if the electron mass was anything but null the energy would diverge.

It's physics, if empirical data shows it nobody gives a shit whether it'd mathematically correct. At least not in the first view semesters.

That's what I'm experiencing in Zürich at least, seems like it's the same for you in Oxford.

I'm not the OP though. So energy is assigned differently to objects moving at c?

>my Oxford University special relativity lecturer
We get it, you go to oxford

>my OXFORD UNIVERSITY special relativity lecturer

Oh my god you are a precious little faggot

>he think rationalists talk about nature, like he was told, rather than their own mental proliferation

How does it feel? How does it feel knowing no matter how hard you work and struggle, OPs life as a contributor to human progress has been solidified while you both will be industry wagecucks whose degrees are worthless outside your own state?

>taking a whole class on SR
You are uneducated and being taught in a way appropriate for your level of understanding.

The energy of photons is assigned on them being waves.
The derivation isn't super complex, but does require basic quantum mechanics.

>doing physics by using math and not physical intuition
You'll never get anywhere in phyiscs

It will be a lecture series lasting about maybe 4 or 5 weeks before moving on to another topic.

>when a mathematician enters in a physics class
ebin bait

im waiting on an interview invitation for ox rn
how is it like studying there? which college/course?

You don't even learn proper spec rel in first year you brainlet. Wait till 3rd year where you actually get to use 4-vectors.

why didn't you debate him/her about it instead of posting it here you loser

>its undefined, she never said she was taking the limit

You're not going to last long in physics.

>has a professional lecturer in front of him
>asks the question on Veeky Forums rather than asking the lecturer
>makes a post just to brag about being on oxford
Yeah kys

you're a fucking animal.

It's not a limit, it's literally 0*infinity.

same way the electric field E in an ideal conductor is 0 because the current j = sigma*E and if j is finite and sigma is infinite E has to be 0.

i will give you a lecture on special niggertivity
the faster you run from the cops, the niggerer you are
if you trespass the nigger max theoretical speed on sweet liquor and crack, you go straight to the kang dimension, becoming an imaginary nigger

This is not strictly true. In Physics, we learn to apply what we know about a system physically to the maths. I.e, taking certain limits, disregarding certain solutions which are unphysical and things like that. It's not so much the proof in empirical data, it's just physical intuition to properly interpret what the maths tells us.

That's fine for general physics.

Mathematically, v = c is not in the domain of the function so it's non sensical to discuss what the limit is. In this sense, it's perfectly acceptable to say infinity because that's taken to mean it's undefined. It's easier to understand for non math majors.

you are just autistic

All it means is that massive particles cannot travel at c. The infinity is irrelevant. If you want you could just say it's undefined and the argument is the same, since we still want the energy to be an actual number. The only reason we assign infinity to it is because the machinery is already there from basic analysis by two point compactification of the real line.

What college, OP? Since you don't get what's going on I'm guessing you're a ChChfag.

ChCh?

Acetylene

If you want an equation that doesn't freak out at v=c, you can just use [math]E \sqrt{1 - v^2/c^2} = m_0 c^2[/math].

hope you get an interview invite senpai

Christ Church

Debate teacher like you know better, as brainlets do

I remember that ugly ass board, although in hindsight it was actually quite a neat design

What the lecturer wrote is correct (well technically the gamma factor just goes towards infinity a v tends to c, at c it's undefined). The point is just to say that light cannit have mass, because if it did then the mass of a photon would be infinite, whih clearly isn't possible. Therefore the energy of a photon is purely the result of its frequency muliplied by the planck constant

The quicker the nigger, the longer he lives. Time dilation and such. Plus he's less likely to get shot

The house is the patricians choice of college. I bet you go to Wadham, stay jealous