Mass-Energy Equivalence: Does E=mc2 Apply in Systems at Rest?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the application of the mass-energy equivalence formula E=mc² in systems at rest. It establishes that in a system with zero total momentum, internal changes will not yield work exceeding mc², provided the system maintains non-negative mass. The conversation also touches on the concept of energy bias, suggesting that the formula does not account for unknown additive energies that could arise from new physical phenomena. Ultimately, the participants confirm that internal changes in a resting system cannot produce work beyond the limits set by mass-energy equivalence.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of mass-energy equivalence (E=mc²)
  • Basic principles of classical mechanics and conservation laws
  • Familiarity with concepts of momentum and energy types (kinetic, potential, field)
  • Knowledge of physical phenomena and their implications on energy calculations
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore advanced topics in mass-energy equivalence and its implications in physics
  • Research the concept of energy bias and its relevance in modern physics
  • Study the role of momentum in closed systems and its effects on energy transfer
  • Investigate new physical phenomena that may introduce unknown energies
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of theoretical physics, and anyone interested in the principles of mass-energy equivalence and its applications in closed systems.

simeonz
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Let's assume that a system has zero total momentum. The following relationship between mass and energy should apply: E=mc^2.

If a system is overall at rest, does that mean that any internal changes to that system, assuming they leave the system with non-negative mass, will not be able to produce more work than mc2? The work is used for reaction with another system, initially placed sufficiently far away to be insignificant when the thought-experiment begins.

To clarify the motivation for my question. I thought of energy as having unknown bias. The number and character of the acting phenomenon (e.g. fields), unknown and not essential to the application of the conservation law from classical mechanics. The total work in a a given period of time and spatial vicinity may (predominantly) involve only part of the entire range of acting forces. But, if the above formula expects the energy to be non-biased aggregate of the system's ability to do work, then adding the potential, kinetic, and field energies, for example, should always produce amount lower than the one predicted by the mass equivalence or would be incomplete/incorrect. Is that the case?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
simeonz said:
If a system is overall at rest, does that mean that any internal changes to that system, assuming they leave the system with non-negative mass, will not be able to produce more work than mc2?
Yes, that is correct.

On the rest of the post, I am not sure what you mean by "bias" in this context.
 
Dale said:
Yes, that is correct.
That is all I needed to know, really. Thanks.
Dale said:
On the rest of the post, I am not sure what you mean by "bias" in this context.
What I meant is that that the equivalence formula excludes the possibility for unknown additive to the energy that can be introduced to compensate "negative energy" appearing in the explanation of new physical phenomenon.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 102 ·
4
Replies
102
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
7K
  • · Replies 83 ·
3
Replies
83
Views
7K