E=mc^2, but nothing can travel faster than light?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between mass, energy, and the speed of light, particularly focusing on the equation E=mc² and the implications of the speed of light being a limit for travel. Participants explore the apparent contradictions and seek clarification on the concepts involved.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion about the relationship between E=mc² and the assertion that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, suggesting a potential contradiction.
  • One participant notes that c² is not a speed but rather has units of m²/sec², indicating a misunderstanding of its role in the equation.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the speed of light squared does not imply that anything travels at that speed, reinforcing the distinction between the equation's components and actual physical speeds.
  • Some participants discuss the interpretation of c² as a static amount in the formula, questioning the implications of mass moving at high speeds and its relation to energy.
  • A participant mentions that the input value in the equation is the speed of light, not its square, and clarifies that any actual speed can be used to calculate energy equivalence.
  • Links to external resources are provided for further reading on the electromagnetic wave equation and the historical context of the mass-energy equation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express confusion and seek clarification, indicating that multiple competing views and interpretations remain unresolved regarding the implications of E=mc² and the speed of light.

Contextual Notes

Some limitations in understanding are noted, particularly regarding the interpretation of c² and its role in the equation, as well as the distinction between theoretical constructs and physical realities.

Cosmic Philo
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I tried to find an answer to this here, but may have missed it.

There must be a flaw in my understanding here, since it seems to be contradictory. Mass times the speed of light squared = Energy, and yet (according to Einstein), nothing can travel faster than the speed of light?

I'm just curious also if anyone has a link handy, what is the equation that led to the famous e = mc^2 formula or are there a series of equations?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Cosmic Philo said:
There must be a flaw in my understanding here, since it seems to be contradictory. Mass times the speed of light squared = Energy, and yet (according to Einstein), nothing can travel faster than the speed of light?

Why do you think there is a contradiction?
 
Of course the speed of light squared is much faster than the speed of light, and yet nothing can go the speed of light (much less that speed squared). If c^2 is impossible, what is the use of the famous equation?

But I must be misunderstading something (or everything! :-D).
 
1. c^2 is not a speed. It has units of m^2 / sec^2, whereas speed has units of m/sec.

2. Even if it were a speed, simply because c^2 appears in an equation does not mean that anything is actually traveling at that speed.
 
jtbell said:
1. c^2 is not a speed. It has units of m^2 / sec^2, whereas speed has units of m/sec.

2. Even if it were a speed, simply because c^2 appears in an equation does not mean that anything is actually traveling at that speed.

That helps, thanks. I've beeen reading various books about physics and trying to grasp the main concepts. So somehow it works out that c^2 works in the formula as a static amount. I was under the impression that moving mass that fast would create energy (i.e., turn the mass into energy).
 
You're looking at an intermediate step in a calculation, not the input value. The input value is the speed of light, not the speed of light squared. You can also enter any actual speed into the equation and get the energy equivalent -- but entering 10 m/sec means your object is moving at 10 m/sec not 100 m/sec (or m^2/s^2).
 
Cosmic Philo said:
That helps, thanks. I've beeen reading various books about physics and trying to grasp the main concepts. So somehow it works out that c^2 works in the formula as a static amount. [..].

c (or c0) is an electromagnetic vacuum constant, related to the impedance of free space; it just happens to correspond to the speed of light in vacuum. See for example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_wave_equation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impedance_of_free_space

PS. the first (?) paper that precisely led to the mass-energy equation is rather complex, but even reading it diagonally may give you a feeling for how it was done:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K