Do not understand why 'c' is squared in Einstein's equation

  • Thread starter Thread starter FlipUnderwood
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the squaring of 'c' in Einstein's equation E=mc², emphasizing its necessity for unit consistency in the MKS (meter, kilogram, seconds) system. The equation's derivation from the postulates of special relativity is highlighted, demonstrating that squaring the speed of light ensures that energy, measured in Joules (kg·m²/s²), aligns with mass and velocity units. Participants clarify that without squaring 'c', the equation would not accurately reflect physical reality or maintain dimensional integrity.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Einstein's theory of special relativity
  • Familiarity with the MKS unit system
  • Basic knowledge of dimensional analysis
  • Concept of energy as mass-energy equivalence
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of E=mc² using the postulates of special relativity
  • Explore dimensional analysis in physics to understand unit consistency
  • Learn about the implications of mass-energy equivalence in modern physics
  • Investigate other physical equations that involve squared terms, such as P=I²R
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators teaching special relativity, and anyone interested in the foundational concepts of energy and mass in theoretical physics.

FlipUnderwood
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am not a dummy but for the life of me, I do not understand why 'c' is squared in Einstein's equation. Math has never been my strength. What purpose does squaring a number (multiplying it by itself) serve?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


This question has absolutely nothing to do with mathematics so I am moving this to the Physics "Special and General Relativity" section. In particular, you aren't "squaring a number", you are squaring a speed, the speed of light.

You should note that, physically, it makes the units work out properly. In the "MKS" (meter, kilogram, seconds) system, energy has units of "Joules" or "kilogram meter^2/second^2". Since mass has units of kg and velocity has units of "meter/second", you must square the speed of light to get those units.
 


It's pretty weird to "see" E=mc^2. I guess for someone who hasn't studied special relativity, this equation seems kind of like a postulate. But really, Einstein derived this equation, and it can be derived using the postulates of special relativity (in a not-too difficult way).

One could say that the square is there to make the units work out, but it also arises from the derivation itself. Of course, at every point in the derivation, the units work out, so at the end of the derivation, the units must also work out. But you need to see the derivation to make sure that the equation is not something like a*mc^3 where a is some quantity which has units of 1/speed, or something else strange like that.
 


Matterwave said:
It's pretty weird to "see" E=mc^2. I guess for someone who hasn't studied special relativity, this equation seems kind of like a postulate. But really, Einstein derived this equation, and it can be derived using the postulates of special relativity (in a not-too difficult way).

Yes, that's the way Einstein did it but special relativity would also result from the postulate that energy is linear correlated with mass.
 


FlipUnderwood said:
I am not a dummy but for the life of me, I do not understand why 'c' is squared in Einstein's equation. Math has never been my strength. What purpose does squaring a number (multiplying it by itself) serve?

Do you also wonder why in P=I^2R, that I is squared?

Zz
 


FlipUnderwood said:
I am not a dummy but for the life of me, I do not understand why 'c' is squared in Einstein's equation. Math has never been my strength. What purpose does squaring a number (multiplying it by itself) serve? z

If you look at the area of a square, given a length 'L', the area is given by Area = L^2. It's squared because that's what makes the equation true. If you simply said E = mc, that wouldn't correspond to reality and the units wouldn't make sense either as has been pointed out. This is just like if you said Area = L. That doesn't correspond to reality and the units don't make sense either. An area can't equal a length just like an energy can't equal a mass * velocity.
 


So we are really getting two distinct explanations- one arguing that the units are such that a speed must be squared and the other giving (or at least referring) to Einstein's proof that the formula is in fact, not just a mass and the square of a velocity but specifically mc^2.
 


The reason is this:

e=mc would be a useless equation.

The end.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 124 ·
5
Replies
124
Views
17K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
7K