How Did Einstein Formulate E=mc²?

  • Context: History 
  • Thread starter Thread starter narrator
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    E=mc2 History
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the historical formulation of Einstein's equation E=mc², exploring the origins, mathematical derivation, and connections to other concepts in physics. Participants seek to understand how Einstein arrived at this equation and its implications within the context of special relativity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that some texts suggest Einstein's formulation was an educated guess and not initially expressed as E=mc², referencing Planck's critical view of the initial formula.
  • Another participant shares a link to a paper that is described as simple to understand, which discusses the relationship between inertia and energy content.
  • It is mentioned that according to Feynman, making educated guesses is a valid part of the scientific process, but the derivation of E=mc² is seen as mathematically grounded rather than purely speculative.
  • A participant explains Einstein's 1905 paper on special relativity, detailing the calculation of kinetic energy and the significance of the terms involving mc², while noting that the paper does not address total or rest energy explicitly.
  • Another participant discusses how Einstein's later paper uses the Doppler shift and conservation of energy to demonstrate that a body releasing energy results in a decrease in mass, leading to the formulation of E=mc².
  • One participant expresses appreciation for the insights shared in the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants present multiple competing views regarding the nature of Einstein's formulation of E=mc², with no consensus on whether it was an educated guess or a mathematically derived conclusion. The discussion remains unresolved on several aspects of the historical context and derivation.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the clarity of assumptions made about the derivation process, the definitions of terms used, and the scope of the historical context provided by participants.

narrator
Messages
241
Reaction score
17
I've been Googling to find out how Einstein worked out his famous equation. Some texts (that may or may not be factual) suggest it was an educated guess and not even expressed as the equation initially. Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E=mc2#Einstein:_mass.E2.80.93energy_equivalence" that Planck was critical of the initial formula. Others go into a more dry discourse on historical moments that led to it.

Does anyone have a link to something reliably factual that leads you along the trail of his discovery in a way that a layman could understand?

One aspect that I've often found difficult to follow is how light speed came to be connected with it. From the outside, the connection isn't readily apparent. I read here somewhere that it has some connection to F=ma.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Science news on Phys.org
narrator said:
Some texts (that may or may not be factual) suggest it was an educated guess and not even expressed as the equation initially.
According to Feynmann, making an educated guess is the correct first step in the scientific process. However, I don't think e = mc^2 falls into that category. Rather, it was derived mathematically from an educated guess that he made earlier that same year and which concerned the constancy of the speed of light in a vacuum. You are correct, however, that the expression was something other than an equation (sort of). Following the link given by phyzguy, we see:
A. Einstein said:
If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass diminishes by L/c²
That's how he expressed it. It is an equation, but it's not dressed up like one.
 
Einstein's big 1905 paper on [what we now call] special relativity, "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies," A. Einstein, Annelen der Physik, June 30, 1905, Einstein calculates the kinetic energy (energy of motion), W, of a particle to be

W = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - v^2/c^2}}mc^2 - mc^2

And using somewhat more modern notation, and defining \gamma,

\gamma \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - v^2/c^2}},

W = \gamma mc^2 - mc^2 .

Of course, that's just the kinetic energy only. There's nothing about total energy, or even rest energy in that equation. But it might make one scratch one's head, "where are all these mc2 terms coming from? It seems important." Although a bit of a jump, it turns out that \gamma mc^2 is the total energy of body, and mc^2 is the rest energy. The total minus rest energy is the kinetic energy. And it's interesting that the above formula for W reduces to the Newtonian W ≈ ½mv2 for v near 0, using the Taylor series expansion. But "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" doesn't take it that far. That paper doesn't make such assumptions about total energy and rest energy.

A few months later Einstein released his "Does the Inertia of a Body Depend Upon Its Energy Content?" paper, that Phyzguy mentioned above. This paper uses the Doppler shift, combined with conservation of energy to show that if a body releases energy E, its mass must decrease by a corresponding amount. And that amount is E/c2. (And like Jimmy Snyder mentioned, the notation and variables are different than what are shown in this post, but with just a change in variables and a little algebra, you can get the E = mc2.)
 
Last edited:
Great post, collinsmark!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
34K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
13K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
6K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
47K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K