How can energy be converted into matter?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 5echild
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Matter
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the theoretical conversion of energy into matter, referencing Einstein's equation E=mc² as a foundational principle. Participants highlight the complexity of the topic, noting that energy is typically measured in joules rather than watts, and emphasize that while energy can indeed be converted into matter, this process is governed by specific physical laws. The conversation also touches on the limitations of current understanding, particularly regarding the reversibility of this conversion and the implications of using precise terminology in physics. The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is mentioned as an experimental confirmation of energy-matter conversion. Overall, the discussion underscores the need for clarity and precision in exploring this complex scientific concept.
5echild
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I don't know either, but I understand that there are people working on this.
For the sake of this discussion let us assume that energy does in fact condense into matter, and further let us assume that we have x amount of energy in watts. My question is how would one convert said amount of energy into matter? What is the formula? Any ideas? This would be most helpful with some work I'm doing.
Thank you much.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
5echild said:
I don't know either, but I understand that there are people working on this.
For the sake of this discussion let us assume that energy does in fact condense into matter, and further let us assume that we have x amount of energy in watts. My question is how would one convert said amount of energy into matter? What is the formula? Any ideas? This would be most helpful with some work I'm doing.
Thank you much.
Watts is a unit of power while Joule is to energy. Anyhow, there's not much proof if matter in the form of energy will consequently reversed back to its original state without compromise. Prof. Shankar from Yale study this type of physics.

Anyhow, Einstein famous equation usually defines the absolute content of energy in a given x matter as you said. E=mc2, others oppose to this formula since, a fixed reference in the universe is not yet found or established. So, they are assuming that all mass in space has some momentum in it, therefore, the equation turns out to be like this
46d9fd53de36a1fc22d818633b0b18b9.png

and by the Second Law of Thermodynamics, that equation is not reversible.
 
5echild said:
For the sake of this discussion let us assume that energy does in fact condense into matter,
We don't need to assume it. It is an experimentally confirmed fact. This is the operating principle behind particle collider's like the LHC.

Ronie posted the correct formula.
 
5echild said:
I don't know either, but I understand that there are people working on this.
For the sake of this discussion let us assume that energy does in fact condense into matter, and further let us assume that we have x amount of energy in watts. My question is how would one convert said amount of energy into matter? What is the formula? Any ideas? This would be most helpful with some work I'm doing.
Thank you much.

The thing about physics that you should be aware of is that practically EVERY concepts and ideas have underlying mathematical formulation or description, and because of this, these ideas and concepts are governed by a large set of rules.

I'm pointing this out to you, and to many who are not familiar with physics, so that you understand why there is a problem with your question. The word "condenses" has more definite meaning than what you are using here, and you may not be aware of it. For example, we say that steam condenses into water. This has very specific meaning and implication in physics, i.e. we simply can't throw out words like that without consequences. It implies that there is some sort of a phase transition, where certain parameters become "discontinuous". In other words, if one uses such a word, one must understand that THIS is what one is implying. That word, and my others, carry with them, certain "baggage".

If you wish to ask how "energy" can change into "matter", then ask that, rather than embellishing it as "condenses" into it. The latter simply adds more constraint to the question that turns it from a simple question, to something more complex.

Zz.
 
So I know that electrons are fundamental, there's no 'material' that makes them up, it's like talking about a colour itself rather than a car or a flower. Now protons and neutrons and quarks and whatever other stuff is there fundamentally, I want someone to kind of teach me these, I have a lot of questions that books might not give the answer in the way I understand. Thanks

Similar threads

Back
Top