Is the Proof of E=mc² Valid for Accelerating Objects in Special Relativity?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter pc2-brazil
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Doubt Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the validity of the proof of E=mc² for accelerating objects within the framework of Special Relativity. Participants explore the implications of using work and relativistic mass in the context of accelerating frames versus inertial frames, and the nature of mass in relativistic physics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a proof of E=mc² using work and relativistic mass, questioning its validity for accelerating objects since Special Relativity is typically associated with inertial frames.
  • Another participant asserts that objects can accelerate within an inertial frame, emphasizing that it is the frame itself that is not accelerating.
  • A different participant argues that Special Relativity can be extended to include accelerated motion, referencing their own blog for details.
  • Some participants challenge the notion of "relativistic mass," with one stating that only rest mass should be considered, while others find the term obsolete but not entirely non-existent.
  • Several participants engage in a discussion about how to measure relativistic mass, with differing opinions on the usefulness of formulas and definitions related to energy and mass.
  • One participant clarifies that the proof discussed uses an inertial reference frame, despite the object being accelerated.
  • Another participant raises concerns about the subjective nature of mass, questioning how different observers can have varying interpretations of an object's mass based on their knowledge.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the application of Special Relativity to accelerating objects, the validity of the proof of E=mc², and the concept of relativistic mass. The discussion remains unresolved with no consensus reached.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the definitions and interpretations of mass may vary depending on the context, and there are unresolved questions about the operational or analytical definitions of physical quantities in relativity.

  • #31
pc2-brazil said:
OK, I was forgetting about centripetal acceleration.

Vector calculus is a very powerful tool in obtaining the most general solutions. This is why I mentioned that the solution I provided is much more general than the one you found. Where did you find iit? What book?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
starthaus said:
Vector calculus is a very powerful tool in obtaining the most general solutions. This is why I mentioned that the solution I provided is much more general than the one you found. Where did you find iit? What book?
Actually, I found it in an online video: http://www.youtube.com/user/matmania1#p/c/7E2FA65CB78B54B0/14/4cS5qvNJJmA". This video is in Portuguese.
My knowledge is somewhat fragmented, since I'm not following a course (just so you have an idea, I've learned the substitution method in integration for the first time today in order to understand a particular step in your derivation). I'm learning from what the Internet has to offer. This forum is a very helpful resource.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #33
pc2-brazil said:
Actually, I found it in an online video: http://www.youtube.com/user/matmania1#p/c/7E2FA65CB78B54B0/14/4cS5qvNJJmA". This video is in Portuguese.
My knowledge is somewhat fragmented, since I'm not following a course. I'm learning from what the Internet has to offer. This forum is a very helpful resource.

If I may suggest an internet source, find C.Moller's book on relativity (The Theory of Relativity). It is very good, a model of rigor and it is...free. I think that it is one of the best, most complete books written on the subject. It covers both SR and GR.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #34
starthaus said:
If I may suggest an internet source, find C.Moller's book on relativity (The Theory of Relativity). It is very good, a model of rigor and it is...free. I think that it is one of the best, most complete books written on the subject. It covers both SR and GR.

Thank you for the suggestion, I will have a look.
By the way: you've answered to my reply so fast that you may haven't noticed the edition I made.
 
  • #35
Also this reference:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #36
Dickfore said:
Also this reference:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/"

Thank you too.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

Undergrad Best Derivation of E=mc^2 - Fdx = V^2 dm
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
High School What is m in Kinetic Energy? Relativistic mass or Rest mass?
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
6K
Undergrad Escape velocity near a black hole: Newtonian or Special Relativity?
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
Undergrad E=mc^2 and acceleration
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
Undergrad The Energy - Momentum Equation vs the Energy - Mass Equation
  • · Replies 131 ·
5
Replies
131
Views
12K
High School Need tips to understand Relativistic Energy in Special Relativity
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
High School Relativistic Photon Mass: Can It Exist?
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Undergrad Deriving e=mc^2, how is it possible?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Undergrad Uncovering a Decent Proof of E=mc^2
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Undergrad Deriving the relativistic rocket equation with exhaust efficiency
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K