Energy apparently equals mass times the speed of light squared

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Einstein's equation E=mc², which defines the relationship between energy (E), mass (m), and the speed of light (c). Participants express confusion about the implications of this equation, particularly regarding the nature of energy and its dependence on mass and environmental factors. Key points include the clarification that the speed of light is not arbitrary but a crucial conversion factor in physics, and that energy within an atom is not infinite but can vary based on its surroundings. The conversation highlights misunderstandings about nuclear fission and the role of neutrons in chain reactions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Einstein's theory of relativity
  • Basic knowledge of nuclear physics, particularly nuclear fission
  • Familiarity with the concept of potential energy
  • Knowledge of the speed of light as a physical constant
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Einstein's theory of relativity, focusing on E=mc² and its implications
  • Explore nuclear fission processes and the role of neutrons in chain reactions
  • Research the concept of potential energy and its applications in physics
  • Investigate the significance of the speed of light in various physical equations
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators, and anyone interested in understanding the fundamental principles of energy and mass in the context of modern physics.

  • #31


dailyplanit said:
But if you are correct (and I believe you are) ...and 1 is a valid number to represent C (1light year per year) then C is not only random in the equation but irrellavent which is exactly the reason so many people ask WHY is it even in the equation? And that is the whole point of the question. If C can =1 and energy is SIMPLY the mass then what idiot decided to complicate it and add C2 in there ...and why ...because a big boom deserves a big number so make it look bigger or what?
This is still wrong. Please go back and reread my post #15, which explains how units work. You need to understand the reality that 186,000=300,000=1 if the units attached to those numbers are related properly. And more importantly, you need to understand what that means: it does not mean that "C" is irrelevant and can be removed from the equation.
 
Science news on Phys.org
  • #32


First of all, if you talk about random numbers you have to give the probability density function.

If the speed of light is a random number as blackbird86 suppose but the standard deviation is very small like 10^{-100000} maybe we cannot differentiate if the speed of light is a constant or a random number.
 
  • #33


I think I may understand what the poster is confused about. They don't understand why the speed of light comes into the equation at all, so they're assuming that IN REGARDS TO THE EQUATION, the speed of light is a randomly chosen number.

If matter could be completely converted into energy, that energy would basically BE light. That's the speed the converted energy would travel, and that's why the speed of light comes into the equation. If an atom decays and we capture every particle emitted by the atom, and measure the energy of those particles(and the energy emitted by the decay of some of those particles), they all add up to e=mc^2.

I'm just a total layman, hopefully I haven't made things more confusing.

EDIT(further elaboration): As far as I can tell, we use the speed of light because it's the only universal constant we know when it comes to energy(light energy). In order to measure energy, you need to have a unit of distance, a unit of time, and a unit of mass. The speed of light takes that all into account. If we want E to be measured in Joules, we have to use the units used to calculate Joules(kilograms, meters, and seconds). So with Joules, C becomes how far light travels in a second, measured in meters. If we wanted to measure in Ergs, we'd use grams, meters and seconds instead. C would still be the same for the equation, but M would have 3 extra zero's. So your E would be a different and larger number, but equivalent to your Joule answer. So the units used in regards to measure the energy, are arbitrary in that sense. From your Joules answer, you can calculate how many BTU's that energy could generate, how many megatons it could create, whatever.

I think most people get confused about this because they don't fundamentally know how energy is measured to begin with.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K