Is There a Basic Element That Connects All Matter and Energy in the Universe?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter tell_me_why
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    E=mc^2
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the relationship between matter and energy, specifically exploring the implications of the equation E=mc². Participants debate whether there exists a fundamental element that connects all matter and energy in the universe, considering various forms of energy production and the nature of mass.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question how matter relates to energy universally, suggesting that all elements might be composed of a single basic element.
  • It is proposed that the energy produced from different elements, like uranium and hydrogen, varies due to the different processes involved (fission vs. combustion), not because E=mc² is incorrect.
  • Participants discuss the need for different equations for different energy production methods, yet emphasize that E=mc² remains a fundamental relationship.
  • One participant suggests that protons, electrons, and neutrons could be considered basic building blocks, while another mentions String Theory as a counterpoint.
  • There is a suggestion that all elements might ultimately derive from a basic element, which could explain the consistency of mass-energy equivalence across different elements.
  • Some participants argue that the energy released in reactions depends on the mass lost, which aligns with E=mc², regardless of the element involved.
  • One participant expresses a belief in a basic element, linking it to the concept of symmetry breaking in particle physics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether a basic element exists that connects all matter and energy. While some agree on the fundamental nature of mass-energy equivalence, others challenge the implications of E=mc² in practical scenarios, leading to an unresolved discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge that energy production processes vary significantly, which complicates the discussion of mass-energy equivalence. There are also references to theoretical frameworks like String Theory and the Standard Model, indicating a reliance on advanced concepts that may not be universally understood.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to individuals exploring foundational concepts in physics, particularly those curious about the relationship between matter and energy, as well as the theoretical underpinnings of particle physics.

tell_me_why
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
So what exactly E=mc^2 says ??

ok all know E=mc2. but apart from that small matter is equi to huge amount of energy what other things can be derived.

1) how could matter directly relate to energy and not individual elements like Uranium, hyd etc. doesn't it mean that all elements and made of one and only one basic element and hence we can say n * basic element = m ,so E= n* basic element * c^2.

what do you guys think ?? if u feel its bogus then explain me how u relate 1gram Uranium produces same energy as 1 gram hydogen asuming the energy conversion is done 100%.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


1 gram of uranium would produce the same amount of energy as 1 gram of hydrogen provided all the mass is completely converted to energy. This is not the case in energy production from fuel. When we use these elements to make usable mechanical energy, we burn hydrogen in okygen, making water vapor. In the case of Uranium, the energy comes from fission.
 


so if hydrogen and uranimum (1 gram) produes different energy then E=mc2 is incorrect..

thats why i said " when converted properly ".
 


Or do we need equations like:

E=mc^2 ----for fission

E=mc^2 * .00000001 ------for combusion like charcoal , wood.

E=mc^2 * .000001 -------for burning petrol.

but we donnt have right ...only E=mc^2.

this simply means every matter is made of same basic element.
 


tell_me_why said:
so if hydrogen and uranimum (1 gram) produes different energy then E=mc2 is incorrect..

No, this is not the case. The reason is that when we use H or U to get energy, we don't convert all the mass to energy. When burning hydrogen, we are breaking and forming covalent chemical bonds betweeb atoms, which is completely different from fission.

The mass-equivalence formula states that mass and energy are exchangable through a numerical constant c2.

For example, General Relativity, predicts that a mass m and an energy E=mc2 will curve space-time equally.
 
Last edited:


tell_me_why said:
this simply means every matter is made of same basic element.

I would agree. But energy condenses out in many differing forms. So I guess the question is why is the symmetry broken.
 


anyway i stongly feel that there is some basic element..

sorry I am not a physics student right now and not aware of any latest therories..

Is there any new theory which say about this basic element i am talking about.

we know atom are madeup of electron and protons and neutron.

quite possible these particles are madeup of some basic elements, and who knows some day we find that

Electron= basic elements * n ---some engery is required to form an electron
similary for proton and neutron...all this should point to basic elements.

its like building madeup of bricks..though different building looks and number of floor but same basic elements.
 
Last edited:


tell_me_why said:
anyway i stongly feel that there is some basic element..

sorry I am not a physics student right now and not aware of any latest therories..

Is there any new theory which say about this basic element i am talking about.

we know atom are madeup of electron and protons and neutron.

quite possible these particles are madeup of some basic elements, and who knows some day we find that

Electron= basic elements * n ---some engery is required to form an electron
similary for proton and neutron...all this should point to basic elements.

its like building madeup of bricks..though different building looks and number of floor but same basic elements.

Yes. Protons, electrons and neutrons are your basic building blocks.
 


DaveC426913 said:
Yes. Protons, electrons and neutrons are your basic building blocks.

Although String Theory says otherwise ;)
 
  • #10


TauCrouton said:
Although String Theory says otherwise ;)
Well, so does the standard model: quarks make up protons. But I think that, since the OP is asking about Uranium and Hydrogen, that that is the level of building blocks he needs to understand.
 
  • #11


my question is related to mass and not to specific elements..
as we are dicussing E=mc^2 which is based on mass and not individual elements.

how it is possible that same mass produce same amount of energy even if they belong to different elements. Logically this is possible only if all elements are made up of some basic element which is reason for mass and energy. as energy is based on this basic element so no matter what element is used to produce energy it will always follow E=mc^2.
 
  • #12


tell_me_why said:
my question is related to mass and not to specific elements..
as we are dicussing E=mc^2 which is based on mass and not individual elements.
What are you not understanding?

If you annihilate one proton, you will get a release of energy equivalent to one proton. It doesn't matter what element that proton is part of. (Note that this is highly oversimplified. There is a host of interactions that will give you different numbers, but they are all accounted-for.)


tell_me_why said:
how it is possible that same mass produce same amount of energy even if they belong to different elements. Logically this is possible only if all elements are made up of some basic element which is reason for mass and energy. as energy is based on this basic element so no matter what element is used to produce energy it will always follow E=mc^2.
Yes. That basic unit is the proton (or neutron).
 
Last edited:
  • #13


tell_me_why said:
Or do we need equations like:

E=mc^2 ----for fission

E=mc^2 * .00000001 ------for combusion like charcoal , wood.

E=mc^2 * .000001 -------for burning petrol.

but we donnt have right ...only E=mc^2.

this simply means every matter is made of same basic element.

When you burn wood in air you get some energy, but you are still left with a lot of the original mass of the wood in the form of ash, soot, smoke, carbon dioxide, water etc. if you could carefully weigh all the waste products you would find a tiny amount of mass was missing and that missing mass *c^2 is equivalent to the energy released. The same is true of fission. After fission there are some remaining fission products but again the missing mass*c^2 is equivalent to the energy released. It is just that fission is more efficient than burning wood, but fission is not a 100% conversion of the nuclear fuel to energy either.
 
  • #14


tell_me_why said:
my question is related to mass and not to specific elements..
as we are dicussing E=mc^2 which is based on mass and not individual elements.

how it is possible that same mass produce same amount of energy even if they belong to different elements. Logically this is possible only if all elements are made up of some basic element which is reason for mass and energy. as energy is based on this basic element so no matter what element is used to produce energy it will always follow E=mc^2.

I think you are right. I think this is the premise that drives people to seek unification. But of course at low energy there is some serve symmetry breaking electrons do not seem like quarks, which do not seem like protons, which do not seem like ...
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Discover the Relationship Between Mass and Energy in Electromagnetic Fields
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Undergrad Deriving e=mc^2, how is it possible?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Undergrad Uncovering a Decent Proof of E=mc^2
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
High School Does E=mc^2 apply to gravitational potential energy?
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
7K
Undergrad Real life example of the energy contained at E=γmc^2
  • · Replies 64 ·
3
Replies
64
Views
5K
High School Where did the 1/2 go in E=mc^2?
  • · Replies 124 ·
5
Replies
124
Views
18K
Undergrad E=MC^2 - easy explanation for kids
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
11K
High School E=mc^2: What is Mass & Matter?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
High School E = mc^2, Wikipedia Mass–energy equivalence Clarification
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
Graduate E=mc^2 in a gravitational field
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K