Do electromagnetic waves have mass? Talking about whether electromagnetic fields have mass or not

Not massive. Only with equivalent quality. The mass converted according to the mass-energy formula is not a real mass, but only an equivalent mass.

Just an equivalent numeric value, but not a true mass property. Mass in the true sense of physics is mass at rest. Static mass and equivalent mass, completely different.

The rest mass is a relativistic invariant that does not change in any 3-dimensional frame of reference. However, the equivalent mass (also called dynamic mass) of energy equivalence is not a relativistic invariant. It can be seen that these two qualities are actually very different, and the physical meaning is completely different.

It is called equivalent mass, and the concept is more accurate, but it is just an equivalent value, which has no substantive physical significance. Called kinetic mass, the concept is easily confused, and this name is not a good name for physics. Electromagnetic waves have energy and momentum, which are real physical properties, not equivalent.

In modern physics, there is equivalence everywhere, but in fact, it is only numerical equivalence, and the physical connotation is completely different. If you really think of equivalence as the same, you can't understand modern physics at all. It is impossible to distinguish the true physical meaning of equivalence, and it is impossible to understand modern physics.

For electromagnetic waves, momentum and energy are what make sense, although we can define their "mass". Here I will explain, I hope it will help the subject understand. Since I am also a layman, if there is any mistake, I would like to correct it.

Due to the wave-particle duality of light, light (electromagnetic waves) has energy and momentum. Its momentum can be expressed as p=h, where denotes the wavelength of the electromagnetic wave, and h is Planck's constant. In X-ray scattering, there is a phenomenon of wavelength change, which can be considered as a change in momentum during the collision, which is the Compton effect.

Knowing the momentum of an electromagnetic wave, it is natural to get its mass m=h c. However, since c is a constant, a change in the amount of electromagnetic fluctuations can be seen as a change in "mass", which is wavelength-dependent. So, in a sense, this "quality" cannot be considered quality in the classical sense.

For fields and electromagnetic waves, momentum and energy are of practical significance, and although we can define their mass, they don't seem to be of much use. <>

Electromagnetic wave. It's substance. Therefore, the physical entities that can be detected by us through the probe should be matter.

However, matter does not necessarily have mass, and whether mass is zero or not is not necessarily related to matter. Energy needs to be carried by matter, so I think there is something wrong with the way the question is asked. Free electromagnetic field.

The mass of the photon is zero, and adding a mass term to the Rallais will destroy the normative invariance of the equation. However, sometimes the condition of the canonical invariance of the equation is too strong, and it is only necessary that the final physical result is canonical invariant, so that the physical mass can be added in some cases and the result is correct. However, even if the electromagnetic field equation of free spin=1 solves the energy of the equation can be non-zero.

For e=mc 2, it must also be correct. <>

For example, when people calculate a black hole and add an electric charge to the Schwarzschild black hole, there is an electromagnetic field outside the black hole, and this electromagnetic field has a t 0 0 component of the non-zero energy-momentum tensor, and according to Einstein's equations, the measure outside the Schwarzschild black hole changes to become a Reissner Nordstr M black hole. The energy density of the electromagnetic field changes the measurement, and it is not unreasonable to call t 0 0 the mass density of the electromagnetic field according to "matter tells space-time how to bend". As for why the photon mass is 0, that is the background field method of field theory.

There is already a classical electromagnetic field in space-time, plus a quantized electromagnetic field, one, the quantized electromagnetic field still has no mass term, and this field is a photon. There is no contradiction between the energy expectation of the background field being positive and the photon mass being 0. <>

If there is mass, it will be due to gravity. There is no gravitational force in the electromagnetic field, so there is no mass. But here we mean that there is no resting mass.

Once it moves, it is an electromagnetic wave, and it still has a moving mass, which is often referred to as light pressure. On the other hand, if the electromagnetic field has mass, then light also has a mass at rest, and according to the theory of relativity, will it propagate at the speed of light?

So photons have no rest mass.

Electromagnetic fields have electromagnetic mass, but since mass is not well understood at the moment, some people think that all mass can be explained by electromagnetic mass. It is also believed that the mass of an object includes both electromagnetic and non-electromagnetic parts. The calculation of electromagnetic mass is to find the energy of the electromagnetic field and then use the mass-energy equation to obtain it.

There is a big difference between the mass that a photon has and whether an electromagnetic wave has mass or not.

The part of the electron mass that originates from the electromagnetic field is the mu code. Its value can be estimated from the electromagnetic field momentum of the electron moving at uniform velocity or from the basis of the mass-energy relation from the electrostatic field energy of the electrostatic electron at rest. In the early days of the development of the theory of electrons, it was assumed that the electromagnetic mass of an electron was equal to the mass determined experimentally.

And from this calculates his radius, which is called the classical radius of the electron.

When the object has an electric field or a magnetic field, the object is electrically shielded or magnetically shielded, and the balance is used to weigh the rent, and the data weighed by all devices (including the shield) is not the same as if there is no electric field or magnetic field.

The data obtained by the balance weighing is the quality and quality of the ear, and the weighing process does not interfere with the balance due to the shielding of the object. The weighing result data is valid. Thus, for the same object, in addition to the conventional mass, there is also electromagnetic mass.

There is mass alone, and it can be measured, what static mass dynamic mass I have never heard of, and the mass is still divided into dynamic and static?

Energy and matter are inseparable. There is no energy without matter, and the definition of energy is based on matter, which is a way of motion of matter. And according to Einstein's mass equation, the mass of light can also be calculated.

Although electromagnetic waves can travel in a vacuum, there is no absolute thing, there is no absolute vacuum, in addition to the thin air in the vacuum we think in space, there must be something else, scientists tentatively named dark matter, it is not yet possible to prove.

Just as oxygen has always existed but was not discovered until the 18th century, sooner or later humanity will unravel the mystery.

Energy and mass are inextricably linked.

For a substance, there must be energy and mass, and vice versa.

Note"Relatively"this word.

Quality is not an absolute quantity.

The energy expression of light is e=h*v (Planck's constant h=kilogram*meter-squared second, v is the frequency of light).

again according to Einstein's mass-energy equation e=m*c 2

So the mass of light is m=h*v (c2).

The resulting mass is very small, as if it were minus 10 to the power.

There shouldn't be, only energy1

Electromagnetic waves occupy time and space, and have a moving mass (zero mass at rest). We can see (light), feel (radio, etc.). It is independent of consciousness, can be perceived by consciousness, and exists objectively. Electromagnetic waves have energy.

So, electromagnetic waves are a substance.

In fact, the analogy can be understood, water waves. Water waves are a form of movement of water, but at the same time, water waves are also a noun and a substance.

Movement forms and movement are not the same concept.

A form of motion means, for example, a rotating ball.

Motion refers to, for example, the rotation of a ball.

It is now believed that electromagnetic waves are a substance, like light waves.