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

In summary, the conversation discusses the question of whether the equation E=mc^2 can be used to calculate the energy of a plane based on its mass and speed, and where the equation originated from. It is mentioned that the equation can be derived from considering a particle absorbing and emitting light, as well as from the concept of relativistic mass and the increase in inertia at high speeds. A link to a forum discussion and a recommendation to look for posts by user "pmb_phys" are also provided.
  • #1
dabith
1
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 alot
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Another question: Where did e=mc^2 come from? How was it derived?
 
  • #3
Sure, use your formula and add :

[itex]
\[
KE = \frac{1}{2}m\,v^2
\]
[/itex]

The rest energy from E=mc^2 and the kinetic energy from above.
 
  • #4
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).
 
  • #5
The complete formula is
[tex]E^2 = \vec{p}\,^2 + m^2[/tex] when one uses units in which c=1. In this formula, [tex]m[/tex] is a constant, the rest mass, and [tex]\vec{p}[/tex] is the linear momentum [tex]\vec{p}=m\vec{v}[/tex]. Alternatively, one can define the mass to be running with speed, such that [tex]E=m[/tex] 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.
 
  • #6
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 [itex]E=pc[/itex]. 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 [itex] \gamma (v)[/itex]. 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:
[tex]m(v) = \gamma m[/tex] with [tex]\gamma = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}[/tex]



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

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:

[tex]E=m \gamma c^2[/tex]


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

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

What is E=mc^2?

E=mc^2 is a famous equation developed by Albert Einstein that relates energy (E) to mass (m) and the speed of light (c). It states that the energy of an object is equal to its mass multiplied by the speed of light squared.

How is E=mc^2 used as a measurement tool?

E=mc^2 can be used as a measurement tool to calculate the amount of energy released in a nuclear reaction. This is because the equation shows the relationship between mass and energy, and in a nuclear reaction, a small amount of mass is converted into a large amount of energy.

Can E=mc^2 be used to measure anything other than energy?

Yes, E=mc^2 can also be used to measure mass and speed of light. If the values of two of these variables are known, the equation can be rearranged to solve for the third variable.

Why is E=mc^2 considered to be one of the most famous equations in physics?

E=mc^2 is considered to be one of the most famous equations in physics because it revolutionized our understanding of energy, mass, and the relationship between the two. It also led to groundbreaking advancements in nuclear physics and the development of nuclear energy.

Is E=mc^2 applicable only to objects at rest?

No, E=mc^2 can be applied to objects in motion as well. However, the equation may need to be modified to account for the effects of special relativity, which states that the laws of physics are the same for all observers in uniform motion.

Similar threads

  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
13
Views
6K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
22
Views
1K
Replies
18
Views
3K
Back
Top