Deriving E=mc^2: A Basic Explanation

  • Thread starter Thread starter villiami
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derivation E=mc^2
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The derivation of Einstein's equation E=mc² is established through both noncovariant and covariant Lagrangian formulations of a free relativistic particle. The discussion highlights the use of differential calculus to demonstrate the relationship between relativistic mass and energy. Key steps include applying Newton's second law, defining differential work, and integrating to arrive at the equation. The conversation also references the conceptual 'light box' approach and critiques its assumptions regarding instantaneous force transmission.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lagrangian mechanics
  • Familiarity with relativistic mass and energy concepts
  • Knowledge of differential calculus
  • Basic principles of electromagnetism
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of E=mc² using Lagrangian mechanics
  • Learn about the implications of relativistic mass in particle physics
  • Explore the 'light box' conceptual model in detail
  • Investigate Einstein's original 1905 paper on mass-energy equivalence
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, educators, and anyone interested in the foundational concepts of relativity and energy-mass equivalence.

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 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
255