So what units should i use with E=mc^2?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jaydnul
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    E=mc^2 Units
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the appropriate units to use with the equation E=mc^2. It emphasizes the importance of squaring the speed of light (c) and correctly pairing units to derive energy in joules, using SI units like kilograms and meters per second. The conversation also highlights that alternative unit systems, such as CGS, can be used, but consistency is key. Participants note that any valid units for mass and velocity can yield meaningful results, as long as the units are tracked properly. Understanding the relationships between different units is essential for accurate calculations of energy.
jaydnul
Messages
558
Reaction score
15
I guess this is a question about what units to use in any equation. Which ones pair together. If you use 300,000,000 m/s and 1 gram in e=mc^2, you will get 300,000,000, but what unit? Joules? How do you know which to use and which ones pair together?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
First, you didn't square c. You would get 9\times 10^{16} \text{ g m}^2/\text{s}^2. Which isn't joules. You pair units up the same way you would for E = mv^2/2. You use kilograms and meters per second and you get joules for energy.

You know what quantities to use when using SI units, right?
 
Oh crap your right, forgot to square. By quantities do you mean the proper prefixes? I know liters, meters, seconds, grams, joules and so on are all associated with metric. If you mean prefixes, then no, i guess that is my question.
 
Meters, kilograms, seconds, and joules go together. These are MKS or SI units.

So do centimeters, grams, seconds, and ergs. These are CGS or Gaussian units.
 
Even though it has a prefix, all quantities calculated with SI use kilograms as the base unit of mass. So a joule is defined as being measured equivalent to kilograms x meters^2/seconds^2.

In real life, you can use any valid units of mass and velocity in E=mc^2 and get a meaningful result. Just keep track of what units you used and don't throw them away. You can measure mass in terms of pounds and velocity in terms of feet per second, and you'd say the energy is measured in terms of pounds feet^2/second^2. As it happens, this combination of units does have a name: it's called a foot-pound. (Why is it called a foot-pound? Because imperial units use "pound" for both mass and force. Sometimes the latter is abbreviated lbf. to say pounds of force. A pound of force applied through one foot is a measure of energy, the foot-pound.)

But really, in order to talk about quantities like energy in terms of nice units (like joules or ergs), you need to have some understanding of what those mean in terms of a small base of units like meters, kilograms, seconds, and so on.
 
So I know that electrons are fundamental, there's no 'material' that makes them up, it's like talking about a colour itself rather than a car or a flower. Now protons and neutrons and quarks and whatever other stuff is there fundamentally, I want someone to kind of teach me these, I have a lot of questions that books might not give the answer in the way I understand. Thanks
I am attempting to use a Raman TruScan with a 785 nm laser to read a material for identification purposes. The material causes too much fluorescence and doesn’t not produce a good signal. However another lab is able to produce a good signal consistently using the same Raman model and sample material. What would be the reason for the different results between instruments?

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
6K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
26
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Back
Top