Re-examining the Energy Equation: Why Does E=mc^2 Fall Short?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter scott_sieger
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the limitations and interpretations of the equation E=mc², particularly in the context of its applicability across different physical scenarios, such as black holes and quantum mechanics. Participants explore whether E=mc² can be considered a comprehensive theory and discuss its implications in various theoretical frameworks.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that E=mc² is not a theory of everything, but rather a result derived from the Theory of Special Relativity.
  • Questions are raised about the conditions under which E=mc² might not hold true, particularly in extreme scenarios like black holes and singularities.
  • One participant argues that while E=mc² indicates a relationship between mass and energy, it does not imply they are the same entity, suggesting they are different perspectives of the same phenomenon.
  • Another participant introduces the concept of virtual interactions and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, claiming that E=mc² is violated in these contexts.
  • A counterpoint is made that the temporary energy fluctuations in virtual interactions do not necessarily violate E=mc², as they still affect space-time similarly to mass.
  • A participant expresses confusion about the inversion of the equation, proposing that a formula must be invertible to be valid and questioning the existence of an equation for anti-energy/matter.
  • There is a discussion about photons being their own antiparticles, which complicates the matter-energy relationship.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the completeness and applicability of E=mc², with no consensus reached on its limitations or the implications of virtual interactions. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the interpretation of energy and mass in extreme conditions.

Contextual Notes

Some claims depend on specific interpretations of quantum mechanics and relativity, and the discussion highlights the complexity of applying E=mc² in various theoretical contexts. Limitations in understanding the implications of virtual particles and energy conservation are noted.

scott_sieger
Hi guys,

Just a provocative thought.

It i said that a good theory for everything must be true in all circumstances.

So, Why does e=mc^2 fail in this regard?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
1+1=2 is also true in all circumstances, but it is not a theory of everything. E=mc2 was derived from Einstein using the Theory of Special Relativity. It is simply a result, it is not a theory.
 
When is e=mc^2 not true?
 
Last edited:
When is e=mc^2 not true?

As Intergral said, e=mc^2 is a result of a theory and not a theory itself. Other results of General Relativity predicted its own downfall, particularly the Bing Bang, black holes and singularities. The rules of General and Special Relativity break down in those areas and other tools are needed to understand them. Quantum Mechanics was developed to help understand these things that General Relativity could not.

It alone doesn't implicitly say that energy and mass are the same thing, merely that if you perfectly convert a mass m to energy, you'll get mc^2 worth of Joules.

I believe the equation does implicitly say that energy and mass are different ways of looking at the same thing.

Remember those toys called “Transformers” we all knew it was a truck, and also a robot in disguise.

S
 
Oh yeah, black holes, always forget about those...
On the second point you made, I apparently made an edit while you where typing your reply, because I realized your point myself, but of course it was only after I hit 'Submit'. Good example though, got to remember that one.
 
E=mc2 is violated within virtual interactions according to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, where [del]E[del]t<h/(4[pi]).
 
Loren, isn't that just a violation of energy conservation? I mean, on a short timescale there is energy that "appears" for virtual interactions as you say, but that is a violation of energy conservation. E=mc^2 more appropriately is interpreted as energy and mass have the same effect on space-time and I don't think anyone says that the temporary energy on the uncertainty time-scale "does not" have the same effect on space-time as mass would...therefore E=mc^2 would not be broken.
 
another test of energy equation

Excuse my ignorance as I am no mathamaticion in fact I didn't even pass Highschool.

But I am under the impression that for a formula to be true it has to be able to be inverted.

So, if e=mc^2 what does anti- energy/matter equal. How would you write an inversion of this equation? Me thinks we can't. Therefore another equation is needed to describe energy and anti-energy. And then that equation would hold true regardless of black holes or other.

Please tell me if my approach is wrong.
 
I think so, it's more of a rule of thumb and applies in mechanics, etc..
 
  • #10
Zimm,

You may be right, that E=mc2 is a physical principle unaffected by (but often appearing in) the HUP, if [del]E=[del]mc2 for all [del]E and [del]m. Regrets.

Scott,

Photons (energy) are their own antiparticle, thus the conversion of matter or antimatter to energy is indistinguishable.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Uncovering a Decent Proof of E=mc^2
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Undergrad Discover the Relationship Between Mass and Energy in Electromagnetic Fields
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
High School Does E=mc^2 apply to gravitational potential energy?
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
7K
Semi-Empirical Mass and E=mc^2 close, but both off? Binding Energy calc
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad Energy in the Schwarzschild spacetime
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
High School What is the meaning of the famous equation E=mc^2?
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K
Graduate Is kinetic energy included in the equation E = hν for a photon?
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
High School Can you reverse Einstein's famous E=mc^2 equation?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
High School Where did the 1/2 go in E=mc^2?
  • · Replies 124 ·
5
Replies
124
Views
18K
Graduate "The 7 Strangest Coincidences in the Laws of Nature" (S. Hossenfelder)
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
13K