Can the equation E=mc^2 be used as a measurement tool?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter dabith
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    E=mc^2 Measurement
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the applicability of the equation E=mc² as a measurement tool, particularly in the context of calculating the energy of a plane given its mass and speed. Participants explore the theoretical underpinnings of the equation, its derivation, and its relevance in classical versus relativistic contexts.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether E=mc² can be used to calculate the energy of a plane, suggesting that c must remain constant.
  • Another participant introduces the kinetic energy formula KE = (1/2)mv², indicating that both rest energy and kinetic energy should be considered.
  • Some participants clarify that potential energy is dependent on conservative forces, while kinetic energy is relative to the observer.
  • A participant mentions that E=mc² is seldom relevant in classical problems, implying a distinction between classical and relativistic energy considerations.
  • Discussion includes various derivations of E=mc², with references to Einstein's gedankenexperiment involving a photon and the relationship between energy and momentum in electromagnetic waves.
  • Another participant discusses the concept of relativistic mass and its implications for energy calculations as an object approaches the speed of light.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the applicability of E=mc² in practical scenarios, particularly regarding its relevance in classical mechanics versus relativistic contexts. There is no consensus on whether the equation can be effectively used as a measurement tool for the energy of a plane.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various derivations and interpretations of E=mc², indicating a reliance on different assumptions and definitions, particularly concerning mass and energy in relativistic contexts. The discussion remains open-ended with unresolved mathematical steps and varying interpretations of energy forms.

dabith
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hey all,

Just discovered your informative forum. In these times of stupidity, its good to see people with a love of knowledge.

A friend asked me the following question:

"if you know the mass & speed of a plane, can you use this theory
to calculate it's energy?"

I assume the answer is no because c has to be a constant (the speed of light). :confused:

Can someone please enlighten me as to whether the equation can be used in this manner?

Thanks a lot
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Another question: Where did e=mc^2 come from? How was it derived?
 
Sure, use your formula and add :

<br /> \[<br /> KE = \frac{1}{2}m\,v^2 <br /> \]<br />

The rest energy from E=mc^2 and the kinetic energy from above.
 
What energy are you talking about? The potential energy depends only on the conservative forces (mostly gravity) acting on the airplane. Its Kinetic energy is
(1/2)mv2 where v is the speed of the airplane (relative to the observer). mc2 gives what might be called its "relativistic" energy which is seldom relevant in classical problems.

I'm trying to remember the simplest derivation of "E= mc2. It can be derived, if I remember correctly, from considering a particle absorbing and then emitting light (calculating both energy and momentum in between absorption and emission).
 
The complete formula is
E^2 = \vec{p}\,^2 + m^2 when one uses units in which c=1. In this formula, m is a constant, the rest mass, and \vec{p} is the linear momentum \vec{p}=m\vec{v}. Alternatively, one can define the mass to be running with speed, such that E=m applies. This is physically motivated by the interpretation in terms of inertia. I do not want to go into semantics here. Try to find Pet's posts (pmb_phys is his user name)
check also wofram

The E=m comes from the nature of 4-vectors : the energy is a component of the energy-momentum 4-vector. 4-vectors transform under a change of referential frame as described by Lorentz transformations (see link above)

The way it was derived by Einstein himself... I am not too sure, I forgot.
 
Einstein himself derived it from a 'gedankenexperiment' involving the movement of a photon in a box, and considering the center of mass as a photon moves from the one side to the other. But this argument relies on another equation, namely that of the relation between energy and momentum in EM waves E=pc. So if you're more comfortable with this equation (following from the Maxwell equations) you could try reading: http://www.geocities.com/physics_world/sr/einsteins_box.htm

Ofcourse using p=mv=mc (in case of a photon) E=pc is basically E=mc^2, but it is a little more subtle than just using the classical formula for momentum.

Another simple derivation is the following (this was the derivation used in my relativity textbook):

In Special relativity (SR) an objects inertia increases as it approaches the speed of light, making it more and more difficult to increase the speed. You could assign this extra inertia to the mass of the object by saying the mass (this is actually called 'relativistic mass' , but I'll call it just mass) increases. Working this out it turns out the mass increases with a factor \gamma (v). This is a velocity dependent function increasing to infinity as the speed v approaches c thus making it impossible to acquire a speed large than c. I SR time slows down and length is shortened by the same factor!

So mathematically this means the mass (m(v)) in terms of it's rest mass (m) will be:
m(v) = \gamma m with \gamma = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}



For low speeds this can be approximated mathematically by:
m(v)=m+\frac{1}{c^2}(\frac{1}{2}m \gamma v^2)

But this last term is a particles low speed kinetic energy divided by c^2! So the kinetic energy of a particle contributes to its mass in a way which is consistent with:

E=m \gamma c^2


Or in terms of relativitsic mass: E=m(v) c^2. Einsteins famous equation!

See also: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=41354
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
6K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 124 ·
5
Replies
124
Views
18K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
7K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K