Half of Energy: Where Does It Go? (Solving e=mv^2)

  • Thread starter Thread starter ankitpandey
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between energy and kinetic energy, specifically questioning the missing half of energy when equating e=mv^2 with the classical kinetic energy formula 1/2mv^2. It highlights that the classical kinetic energy equation is only applicable at low velocities, while the relativistic kinetic energy formula T = mc^2(γ-1) provides a more accurate representation at high speeds. Participants emphasize the importance of using correct formulas to avoid confusion between relativistic and non-relativistic physics. Clarification on the source of the formulas is requested to enhance understanding. The conversation underscores the need for precision in discussing energy equations in physics.
ankitpandey
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
combining wavelength(&)=h/mv and e=hv/& , we get e=mv^2
but kinetic energy is 1/2mv^2. where is other half?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ankitpandey said:
combining wavelength(&)=h/mv and e=hv/& , we get e=mv^2
but kinetic energy is 1/2mv^2. where is other half?
Kinetic energy only takes the form 1/2mv2 in classical mechanics, which is only valid for low velocities. The full expression for relativistic kinetic energy is

T = mc^2\left(\gamma-1\right)

You should also note that your first two expression are only valid for v = c.
 
You might want to start with formulas that are actually correct, and not confuse relativistic stuff with non-relativistic stuff. Can you explain more clearly what formulas you're using and where you got them from? If you need greek symbols and don't know LaTeX, copy and paste from Redbelly98's https://www.physicsforums.com/blog.php?b=347 .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
THANKS, Hootenanny
 
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
I am attempting to use a Raman TruScan with a 785 nm laser to read a material for identification purposes. The material causes too much fluorescence and doesn’t not produce a good signal. However another lab is able to produce a good signal consistently using the same Raman model and sample material. What would be the reason for the different results between instruments?
Back
Top