E=mc^2 in Natural Units: Understanding the Meaning of c^2

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter DaveC426913
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    E=mc^2 Natural Units
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the interpretation of the equation E=mc², specifically focusing on the meaning of c² in natural units. Participants explore the implications of using natural units versus conventional units in physics, particularly in relation to energy and mass equivalence.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that c² serves as a conversion factor to relate mass and energy in conventional units of kg, m, and s, suggesting that in natural units, the equation simplifies to E=m.
  • One participant questions whether this implies that one gram of mass could exert a force to move another gram of mass one light-second per second squared, seeking clarification on the practical implications of this interpretation.
  • Another participant references Wikipedia to illustrate the relationship between energy and mass, providing the equation E = m(299,792,458 m/s)², but is met with criticism for only addressing unit definitions rather than deeper implications.
  • A later reply mentions that not all natural unit systems define the unit velocity as the speed of light, introducing the concept of atomic units where the speed of light is expressed differently, leading to a modified form of the equation E = m(1/α²).
  • It is noted that in natural units, energy and mass can be treated as dimensionless quantities, which can lead to different interpretations depending on the chosen unit system.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of c² and its implications in natural units. There is no consensus on the practical applications of these interpretations, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the clarity of these concepts.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on the definitions of natural units and the potential for confusion regarding the implications of using different unit systems. Some mathematical steps and assumptions underlying the discussions are not fully resolved.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying theoretical physics, particularly in the areas of energy-mass equivalence, natural units, and the implications of unit systems in physics.

DaveC426913
Gold Member
2025 Award
Messages
24,447
Reaction score
8,683
Somewhere a month or two ago, there was a discussion about E=mc^2 and the question of what the c^2 represents.

The answer was that c^2 was simply a conversion unit, to put it in more common units of kg, m and s. That, if the formula were considered in more natural distance units of light seconds, it resolves to simply E=m.

Could someone elaborate?

Does it mean that, say, one gram of mass, if converted to energy, could apply a force that would move a gram of mass one light-second per second squared? Or some such?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
A quick look at Wikipedia gives an example of:

E (joules or kg·m²/s²) = m (kilograms) multiplied by (299,792,458 m/s)²

Is this the type of answer you were looking for?

The relevant page is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E%3Dmc%C2%B2"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E=mc²
 
Last edited by a moderator:
also take a look at Wikipedia articles on Natural units and Planck units.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_units
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_units

not all natural unit systems define the unit velocity to be the speed of light c (such as atomic units). but then the unit velocity is \alpha c. in those units then the speed of light is not 1 but is 1/ \alpha and it comes out as

E = m \frac{1}{\alpha^2}.
 
drphysic said:
A quick look at Wikipedia gives an example of:

E (joules or kg·m²/s²) = m (kilograms) multiplied by (299,792,458 m/s)²

Is this the type of answer you were looking for?
No. All you've shown is what the units are.
 
I guess I'd better laocte the thread and perhaps the thread-poster.
 
DaveC426913 said:
Somewhere a month or two ago, there was a discussion about E=mc^2 and the question of what the c^2 represents.

The answer was that c^2 was simply a conversion unit, to put it in more common units of kg, m and s. That, if the formula were considered in more natural distance units of light seconds, it resolves to simply E=m.

Could someone elaborate?

Does it mean that, say, one gram of mass, if converted to energy, could apply a force that would move a gram of mass one light-second per second squared? Or some such?
In natural units, E and m have the same units. You can pick any common unit you want. The most common choice for nuclear physics is MeV.
The mass of an electron is .511 Mev.
 
Meir Achuz said:
In natural units, E and m have the same units.

which is dimensionless for both. they are the ratio of the energy (or mass) in units of any consistent system of units to the quantity of energy (or mass) of the corresponding natural unit as measured in the same consistent system of units. in natural units, physical quantities are dimesionless.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
7K
  • · Replies 124 ·
5
Replies
124
Views
17K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K