B Can you reverse Einstein's famous E=mc^2 equation?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around the misunderstanding of Einstein's E=mc^2 equation, particularly the claim that speeding up matter to the speed of light turns it into pure energy. Participants clarify that the equation actually relates mass to energy equivalence, emphasizing that energy is a property of matter and not a standalone substance. The idea of reversing the equation to convert energy back into matter is debated, with some asserting that the original premise is fundamentally flawed. The conversation highlights the importance of addressing misconceptions about relativity rather than engaging in advanced theoretical discussions. Overall, the thread underscores the need for clear understanding of the principles behind E=mc^2.
gabi123
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
E=mc^2 states that when you speed up matter to the speed of light, it becomes pure energy, of mc^2 joules. Now, if that is true, can you reverse the equation? Wouldn't energy speed up to the negative speed of light(-c^2), turn into matter? Or is that the wrong balance?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
gabi123 said:
E=mc^2 states that when you speed up matter to the speed of light, it becomes pure energy, of mc^2 joules.
No it does not state that. It states that the mass in any object corresponds to an equivalent amount of energy - relating the energy of an object to its inertia. Also note that there is no such thing as "pure energy". Energy is a property of matter and fields, not a substance of its own.

gabi123 said:
Now, if that is true
It is not, so I will not comment on the rest of your post.
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman
Orodruin said:
No it does not state that. It states that the mass in any object corresponds to an equivalent amount of energy - relating the energy of an object to its inertia. Also note that there is no such thing as "pure energy". Energy is a property of matter and fields, not a substance of its own.It is not, so I will not comment on the rest of your post.
It is true to the extent that a certain amount of energy can be the equivalent amount of mass.
 
lychette said:
It is true to the extent that a certain amount of energy can be the equivalent amount of mass.
Did you even read the OP? The first sentence in the OP is simply false and makes no sense in relativity.
 
Orodruin said:
Did you even read the OP? The first sentence in the OP is simply false and makes no sense in relativity.
I did read the first statement but it in no way contradicts his/her later statement that energy can be converted into mass according to the theory of relativity.
My contribution relates to that second statement.
 
lychette said:
I did read the first statement but it in no way contradicts his/her later statement that energy can be converted into mass according to the theory of relativity.
My contribution relates to that second statement.
Please read the statement again. It refers to reversing "when you speed up matter to the speed of light, it becomes pure energy", which is pure nonsense in itself.
 
Orodruin said:
which is pure nonsense in itself

Funny, I thought that's what I wrote.

Since the whole premise of this thread is based on something incorrect, what do we have to discuss?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Vanadium 50 said:
Funny, I thought that's what I wrote.

Since the hole premise of this thread is based on something incorrect, what do we have to discuss?
It was, but you deleted that post.

At B level, I think the important thing is to straighten out people's misconceptions rather than having a high level discussion. If we cannot do this, then what is the point of a B level thread? Nobody should expect (or engage in!) high level discussions at B level. Having misconceptions - often fueled by popular science - is not directly equivalent to being a crackpot.
 
  • Like
Likes Nugatory and berkeman

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
16
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top