Deriving E=mc^2: A Basic Explanation

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

Discussion Overview

The discussion focuses on the derivation of the equation E=mc², exploring various approaches and interpretations. Participants engage with theoretical frameworks, mathematical reasoning, and conceptual clarifications related to the equation's implications in physics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested, Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant requests a basic derivation of E=mc², indicating a need for clarity on the topic.
  • Another suggests using the free particle Lagrangian to derive the equation, emphasizing the importance of this method.
  • Some participants reference previous discussions on the same topic, suggesting that it has been addressed multiple times in the forum.
  • One participant expresses skepticism about the sufficiency of the referenced threads in providing a proof for E=mc², asserting that both noncovariant and covariant Lagrangian formulations can yield the proof.
  • A detailed mathematical derivation is presented, involving Newton's second law, differential calculus, and the relationship between relativistic mass and energy, culminating in a differential form of Einstein's formula.
  • Another participant introduces a conceptual approach involving two masses and the role of light in momentum transfer, raising questions about the implications for the center of mass and the mass carried by light.
  • This participant derives a relationship suggesting that energy is equivalent to a change in mass, leading to the conclusion E = Δmc².

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the sufficiency of existing proofs and methods for deriving E=mc². While some advocate for the Lagrangian approach, others challenge its completeness or clarity. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best method to derive the equation.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the complexity of the derivations and the potential for misunderstanding, indicating that prior knowledge of relativistic dynamics and Lagrangian mechanics may be necessary for full comprehension.

villiami
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
I know this is basic, but how is E=mc^c derived.

Thanks Heaps
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Take the free particle Lagrangian and compute:
W=\vec{v}\cdot\frac{\partial L}{\partial\vec{v}}-L

Daniel.
 
I notice that you, yourself, da willem, answered the question three times: once in each thread. If only that kind of persistence were rewarded somehow! :frown:
 
What do you mean?
 
Sorry, now I see
 
Those links DO NOT GIVE PROOF TO E=mc^{2}...Both noncovariant and covariant lagrangian formulations of free relativistic particle give the proof.

Daniel.
 
dextercioby said:
Those links DO NOT GIVE PROOF TO E=mc^{2}...Both noncovariant and covariant lagrangian formulations of free relativistic particle give the proof.

Daniel.
Can you explain in detail? I found myself difficult to understand the statement.
 
There's a lotta say,really.U need to build a lagrangian which would give the correct dynamics (motion equations) and be a relativistic/Lorentz invariant/scalar.
I think this stuff is described in electrodynamics books.In order to discuss relativistic particle in interaction with a classical EM field,u need to analyze the free particle first.I don't remember seing this issue in Jackson,nor in Goldstein,but I'm sure it has to be somewhere,just have the interest to look for.

Daniel.
 
  • #10
Okay,here's an elementary proof,i'd call it HS level,using differential calculus.
Assume for simplicity only one space-component.So the whole discussion would involve scalars.

Newton's second law:

\frac{d(m_{rel}v)}{dt}=F(1)

Multiply with dt:

d(m_{rel}v)=Fdt (2)

Substitute dt with:

dt=\frac{dx}{v}(3)

d(m_{rel}v)=F\frac{dx}{v}(4)

Define differential work:

\delta L=Fdx(5)

Use the Leibniz theorem in differential form:

dE=\delta L\Rightarrow dE=Fdx(6)

Rewrite (4) in terms of the differential of energy:

v d(m_{rel}v)=dE (7)

Everybody knows that:

m_{rel}=\gamma m_{0}=\frac{m_{0}}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^{2}}{c^{2}}}} (8)

Expand (7):

v^{2}dm_{rel}+m_{rel}vdv=dW(9)

Differentiate (8):

dm_{rel}=\frac{m_{0}\gamma v dv}{c^{2}-v^{2}}(10)

Plug (10) in (9) and factor:

m_{0}\gamma v dv(\frac{v^{2}}{c^{2}-v^{2}}+1)=dE(11)

Therefore:

m_{0}\gamma v dv \frac{c^{2}}{c^{2}-v^{2}}=dE(12)

Or:

c^{2}(\frac{m_{0}\gamma v dv}{c^{2}-v^{2}})=dE(13)

Taking into account (10),one finally finds the diferential form of Einstein's formula:

c^{2}dm_{rel}=dE(14)

Integrating with corresponding limits (zero relativistic mass,zero energy),one finds:

m_{rel}c^{2}=EDaniel.

EDIT:THAT is a proof... :approve: It took me 10 minute to cook. Though the Lagrangian approach is simply PERFECT. :wink:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
I like the conceptual 'light box' approach that daWillem uses, which was originally proposed by Einstein, I believe. However, it is somewhat inaccurate because it assumes instantaneous transmission of forces through the box.

The box part really is not needed. All you need are two masses. Conceptually, it goes like this:

Two equal masses, m1 and m2 (=m) at co-ordinates -d,0 and d,0 (origin at centre of mass). Since light has energy E = hf and momentum E/c (= hf/c), when a photon leaves m1, m1 recoils with momentum E/c. When the photon is stopped by m2, m2 takes on momentum E/c = mv (so v=E/cm). In time t=2d/c, m1 moves distance s=vt = E2d/mc^2. At time t after m1 begins moving, m2 receives momentum E/c.

Now you can see where there is a problem. Unless some mass is transferred, the centre of mass has moved! Newton's third law takes care of this where the masses are not separated by a distance as the changes in motion occur at the same instant. But when the momentum change is provided by light, there will be a shift in the centre of mass unless light carries mass with it.

How much mass does it have to carry with it? Work it out: In order to conserve the centre of mass at time t, m1(-d) + m2d = 0 = m1'(-d1') + m2'd. Since d1'=d+s = d+E2d/mc^2, we have:

(m + \Delta m)(d) = (m-\Delta m)(d + E2d/mc^2)

md + \Delta md = md - \Delta md + mE2d/mc^2 - \Delta mE2d/mc^2) or:

2\Delta md + \Delta mE2d/mc^2 = 2Ed/c^2

Ignoring the negligible 1/mc^2 term (this actually disappears if you take into account the \gamma factor but we can avoid the math because we can see that m>>\Delta m):

\Delta m = E/c^2 or:

E = \Delta mc^2

The explanation from Einstein's "m = L/c^2" paper in 1905 is also quite understandable. The original translation is here:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/

AM
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
556