E =mc{squared} How Did He Arrive At This ?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter nu_paradigm
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation and implications of the equation E=mc², exploring the thought processes behind its formulation, the significance of units, and the nature of relationships in physics. Participants engage in a mix of conceptual clarification and debate regarding the equation's meaning and the role of units in scientific equations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that groundbreaking theories, including E=mc², may stem from educated guesses.
  • There is a discussion about the coincidence of the formula's simplicity and its compatibility with human-defined units like meters and kilograms.
  • One participant argues that units are arbitrary and that the physical concepts of energy and mass are fundamentally related, which was not previously considered.
  • Another participant questions whether the units of measurement were invented to reflect physical relationships, leading to a clarification that units are arbitrary scalings of different quantities.
  • Some participants assert that the relationship expressed in E=mc² is exact, provided that all quantities are in compatible units, while others discuss the implications of using different units.
  • There is a contention regarding the nature of E=mc² as a proportionality versus an equality, with differing views on whether it represents a proportional relationship or a strict equality.
  • Participants highlight the importance of consistency in units and the derived nature of physical laws from experimental observations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the interpretation of E=mc², the significance of units, and whether the equation represents a proportionality or an equality. The discussion remains unresolved with no consensus reached.

Contextual Notes

Some statements reflect uncertainty about the nature of units and their relationship to physical quantities. The discussion includes various assumptions about the derivation of equations and the role of constants in different unit systems.

  • #31
whozum said:
I remember he rejected a major part of his discoveries, but I don't remember which. He refused to believe, I think that the universe was expanding.

You're thinking of his original model of the universe that included a cosmological constant. He later said it was a mistake to include it because the observations showed an expanding universe. This implied that he believed those observations. However, I think he had a problem with black holes. I'm not an expert on the history.


Why is this? Science is absolute is it not? Once you prove something, its proven and should be accepted?

He didn't prove that his theory applied to all situations. It probably doesn't. Newton's certainly didn't.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 124 ·
5
Replies
124
Views
17K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
6K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K