Interesting Coincidence with Classical/Modern View of Mass and Energy

In summary, classical physics shows energy as a scalar multiple of mass, as seen in the example of joule where 1 J = 1 kg*(m/s)^2. This can be interpreted as a dot product of the vector quantity of motion (m/s), leading to the similarity between E=MC^2 and the units of energy and mass. This suggests a connection between energy and mass in relativity, where both have the same units when the speed of light is set to 1. However, if nonrelativistic kinetic energy were to follow a different formula, the rest energy would also have to change in order to maintain meaningful physics.
  • #1
Cadaei
24
1
Has anyone ever noticed that, even in classical physics, energy is shown as a scalar multiple of mass?

For example, consider the joule;

1 J = 1 kg*(m/s)^2

If you consider the units of motion (m/s) to be a vector quantity, then squaring such a vector would be interpreted as a dot product that produces a scalar.

1 J (energy) = [mass in kg]*[scalar speed]

Which is eerily similar to E=MC^2. Thus, whether anyone in the past realized it or not, did they inadvertently stumble on the mass-energy equivalence just by dealing with these units?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The units in a physical formula actually do work out? What a coincidence!
 
  • #3
Creepy! :bugeye:
 
  • #4
If you set the speed of light to 1, mass and energy have the same units. This is not a coincidence, and shows that the concepts are related in relativity.

If, for some strange reason, nonrelativistic kinetic energy would be something like mv^3, the rest energy of objects should be something like mc^3. But I do not think this would give meaningful physics.
 
  • #5


This is a fascinating observation and it does seem to suggest a connection between classical physics and the famous equation E=MC^2. However, it is important to note that the concept of energy has evolved significantly over time and was not always understood or measured in the same way. So while there may be a coincidence in the units of energy and mass, it is not necessarily evidence of a deeper connection between the two concepts.

In classical physics, energy was primarily thought of as the ability to do work, and was measured in units such as joules or foot-pounds. It wasn't until Albert Einstein's theory of special relativity that the concept of energy was expanded to include mass and the famous equation E=MC^2 was derived.

Furthermore, the units of energy and mass in classical physics were not always consistent. For example, in the early 19th century, energy was often measured in units of "calories," which were defined as the amount of energy needed to raise the temperature of one gram of water by one degree Celsius. This unit does not have a direct relationship with mass and speed, as seen in the joule equation.

So while it is interesting to note the similarity in units between energy and mass in classical physics, it is likely just a coincidence and not evidence of a deeper connection. It was only through Einstein's groundbreaking work that we now understand the true relationship between mass and energy.
 

1. What is the classical view of mass and energy?

The classical view of mass and energy is based on the laws of classical physics, specifically Newton's laws of motion and the law of conservation of energy. In this view, mass and energy are considered to be separate and distinct entities.

2. What is the modern view of mass and energy?

The modern view of mass and energy is based on the theory of relativity, specifically Einstein's famous equation E=mc^2. In this view, mass and energy are considered to be interchangeable and can be converted into one another.

3. What is an interesting coincidence between the classical and modern views of mass and energy?

An interesting coincidence is that both the classical and modern views of mass and energy can be used to explain the same physical phenomena, such as the motion of objects and the behavior of particles at high speeds. However, they use different principles and equations to do so.

4. How do the classical and modern views of mass and energy differ?

The main difference between the classical and modern views of mass and energy is that the classical view sees them as separate and distinct, while the modern view sees them as interchangeable. Additionally, the classical view is based on classical physics, while the modern view is based on the theory of relativity.

5. Why is it important to understand the classical and modern views of mass and energy?

Understanding both the classical and modern views of mass and energy is important because it allows us to have a more comprehensive understanding of the physical world around us. It also helps us to make accurate predictions and calculations in various fields of science, such as physics and engineering.

Similar threads

Replies
20
Views
660
  • Classical Physics
Replies
15
Views
525
  • Special and General Relativity
4
Replies
125
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
212
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
235
Replies
2
Views
154
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
86
Views
4K
Back
Top