Is the Speed of Light the Ultimate Conversion Point for Energy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Einstiensqd
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    E=mc2
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around the concept of light speed as a conversion point to energy, challenging Einstein's theories of special relativity. One participant argues that the true conversion point for pure energy should be based on a hypothetical speed that allows one to traverse the universe's perimeter instantaneously, suggesting this would create a visual blur around the universe. This perspective raises questions about the implications of an expanding universe on the rest energy of mass, suggesting that if the universe is indeed expanding, it could violate the First Law of Thermodynamics. The conversation touches on mathematical concepts, including the idea that attempting to calculate the speed required to circumnavigate the universe in no time leads to infinity, which is mathematically undefined. Additionally, the discussion references the derivation of E=mc² and the implications of reaching light speed, where time would effectively stop.
Einstiensqd
I don't see eye to eye with Einstien on this one. how is light speed the conversion point to energy. I think the conversion point for pure energy is at a speed equall to the distance to come all the way around the perimeter of the universe and not take time to do so. So, hypotheticaly speaking, you would see a blur all around the edge of the universe for less than a second.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Einstein did not just concoct this equation because he felt it was pretty. This equation is derived from the two postulates of special relativity.

- Warren
 
Darn I just went off on someone for bad grammer and I just reread my last post and it is sprinkled with mistakes. Disregard the last post and read this one...

Since the Universe is expanding, the perimeter of the Universe is constantly changing; which by your reasoning, means that the rest energy of any mass is constantly increasing (because we think the universe is expanding not contracting) That, of course means the 1st Law of Thermodynamics would be broken. Besides if you try to figure out what the "speed equal to the distance to come all the way around the perimeter of the universe and not take time to do so" is you will get infinity. You are dividing a finite number (assuming the Universe is finite which makes sense otherwise how could it expand)by 0 which is basically undefined. But if we put on our calculus hats then we can more or less say it is infinity (calm down math nuts what I meant to say was that the limit as the denominator approaches 0 is infinity).

Besides Chroot is correct.
 
Hmm? Did I miss something?

Anyway, a good website on E=Mc2's derivation:
http://www.davidbodanis.com/old/r4.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
According to special relativity time will stop if anybody reaches the speed of light (C). If I'm right then it would take no timefor the body to go around the parametre of the universe in no time.
 
comparing a flat solar panel of area 2π r² and a hemisphere of the same area, the hemispherical solar panel would only occupy the area π r² of while the flat panel would occupy an entire 2π r² of land. wouldn't the hemispherical version have the same area of panel exposed to the sun, occupy less land space and can therefore increase the number of panels one land can have fitted? this would increase the power output proportionally as well. when I searched it up I wasn't satisfied with...
Back
Top