- #1

- 27

- 2

There is the well known E=mc^2 where c is v.light but the mass is not half here. Why?

- Thread starter brian.green
- Start date

- #1

- 27

- 2

There is the well known E=mc^2 where c is v.light but the mass is not half here. Why?

- #2

jbriggs444

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

2019 Award

- 9,193

- 3,895

E = Fd

If you accelerate an object up to a velocity of v with a constant force then it will have a constant acceleration. Its average velocity during the acceleration will be half of its maximum velocity [right there is your factor of two]. The distance it will cover during the process of accelerating to a velocity of v over a time t will be equal to elapsed time times average velocity:

d = vt/2.

The acceleration required to reach velocity v in time t is:

a = v/t

The force required to achieve that (F=ma) is:

F = mv/t

Put it together and you have

E = Fd = vt/2 * mv/t = mv^{2}/2

- #3

- 1,949

- 365

If you understand m*v then let's start with it. In classical mechanics (and that's what we are talking about here) momentum is defined asThe kinetic energy equ. is 1/2m*v^2 but why just 1/2m and why v^2? I understand why m*v but the rest of it not make sense for me.

[itex]p: = m \cdot v[/itex]

force is defined as the change of momentum with time:

[itex]F: = \frac{{dp}}{{dt}} = m \cdot \frac{{dv}}{{dt}}[/itex]

and mechanical work is defined as the product of force and displacement:

[itex]dW: = F \cdot ds = m \cdot v \cdot dv[/itex]

Integration of the work gives the change of kinetic energy:

[itex]E_{kin} = \int {m \cdot v \cdot dv} = {\textstyle{1 \over 2}}m \cdot v^2[/itex]

That's where 1/2 and v^2 come from.

That's something completely different becauseThere is the well known E=mc^2 where c is v.light but the mass is not half here. Why?

1. It's not classical mechanics but relativity.

2. It's not kinetic energy but rest energy.

- #4

davenn

Science Advisor

Gold Member

2019 Award

- 9,317

- 7,893

try this ....

http://www.citycollegiate.com/workpowerenergy_Xc.htm

Dave

- #5

- 27

- 2

Thanks Dave, I understand now! The well known equ. is not correct, not the mass is half actually.

- #6

jbriggs444

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

2019 Award

- 9,193

- 3,895

##E_0=mc^2## is correct. But it is the formula for rest energy, not for kinetic energy. It is the energy equivalent of an object's mass when the object is just sitting there.Thanks, I understand now! The well known equ. is not correct, not the mass is half actually.

##E^2 = m^2c^4 + p^2c^2## is a generalization that gives total energy E in terms of mass m and momentum p.

##E = \frac{mc^2}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}## is a generalization that gives total energy E in terms of mass m and velocity v.

If you extract kinetic energy KE = Total energy - Rest energy = ##\frac{mc^2}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}} - mc^2## then you get something for which ##KE=\frac{1}{2}mv^2## is a very good approximation.

So the two formulas are not in conflict. They are, in fact, compatible.

- Last Post

- Replies
- 12

- Views
- 5K

- Replies
- 11

- Views
- 4K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 1K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 13

- Views
- 1K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 2K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 2K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 10

- Views
- 3K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 19

- Views
- 1K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 902

- Last Post

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 3K