After 103 years, Einstein's E=MC2 proved

[Glenns]

Does anyone know how the supercomputers did it rather than the empirical approach? Also, energy can also be converted to mass, but how? Is there any evidence of this occurrence?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081120/sc_afp/sciencephysicseinstein_081120235605

 

[WilliamD]

Does anyone know how the supercomputers did it rather than the empirical approach? Also, energy can also be converted to mass, but how? Is there any evidence of this occurrence?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081120/sc_afp/sciencephysicseinstein_081120235605

1) No idea how the computers did it.

2) Energy creates mass if there's enough of it. This is the whole principle behind the LHC, it creates high enough energies that large particles are created.

3) Assume you have two quarks. If you try to separate them, the strong force between them will be so great, that 2 new quarks will be created by the energy of the strong force. This process creates 2 new quark pairs. This is analogous to separating a magnet and consequently creating two new magnets, each with a north and south pole.

 

[Vanadium 50]

This is simply sensationalism in the reporting. This is certainly not a "proof" of Einstein in any sense of the word (in fact, the calculation itself assumes relativity). It is a new and better calculation of the mass of the proton in terms of a fundamental parameter of the theory of strong interactions.

 

[george77]

QCD binding energy

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081120/sc_afp/sciencephysicseinstein_081120235605

 

[Mentz114]

Is there any evidence of this occurrence?

1. Atom bombs and reactors - using fission
2. The sun - using fusion.

 

[MeJennifer]

Does anyone know how the supercomputers did it rather than the empirical approach? Also, energy can also be converted to mass, but how? Is there any evidence of this occurrence?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081120/sc_afp/sciencephysicseinstein_081120235605

Interesting!

What this demonstrates is that what most call rest mass is actually mostly relativistic mass.

Who knows, perhaps some smart scientist will in the future discover that mass is just zitterbewegungen within the Planck volume

 

[George Jones]

mtallingham, read the the message in your personal message box.

 

[mtallingham]

Thanks George for explaining that, But isn’t it food for thought, where else could I post it, do you think