Terminology of Convert: What's the Right Term?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Semipro
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Convert Terminology
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the terminology surrounding the concepts of "convert" and "transform" in physics, particularly regarding the relationship between mass and energy. Participants argue that while energy can be transformed into matter, it is more accurate to state that matter can be converted into energy, as matter can be destroyed. The consensus emphasizes that energy is conserved in these processes, and matter is fundamentally a form of energy, specifically rest energy. The distinction between "convert" and "transform" is also highlighted, with a preference for using "form" when discussing energy types.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the law of conservation of energy
  • Familiarity with Einstein's mass-energy equivalence (E=mc²)
  • Basic knowledge of different forms of energy (kinetic, potential, nuclear)
  • Conceptual clarity on the definitions of "convert" and "transform" in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research Einstein's mass-energy equivalence and its implications
  • Study the law of conservation of energy in various physical processes
  • Explore the different forms of energy and their interconversions
  • Examine academic literature on the terminology used in physics regarding matter and energy
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators, and anyone interested in the fundamental principles of energy and matter, particularly in understanding the nuances of scientific terminology.

Semipro
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
My language is not English and i have got some problem in terminology .
In physics , what's the meaning of "convert" ?
Somewhere like Wikipedia claims that mass is not converted to energy since mass and energy can not be destroyed but Elsewhere claims that Energy can be converted into matter
According to above it's necessary to destroying energy to converted it into matter and this is a violate of energy conversation .
Hence , i think "matter can be converted into energy" is a right term since matter can be destroyed but "energy can be converted into matter" is a wrong term and is better to say "energy can be created matter" .
How off am i ?
In an academic view which of these are OK ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Matter is a type of energy. You just transform one type of energy in another type of energy.
Energy is conserved in those processes.
 
mfb said:
Matter is a type of energy. You just transform one type of energy in another type of energy.
Energy is conserved in those processes.

Also there are some problems in meaning of transform .
We know energy's got some forms like mass , kinetic , Nuclear and so on but matter is not form of energy . "transform" uses for forms of energy
I think is better to say matter can be formed from energy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forms_of_energy
 
We know energy's got some forms like mass , kinetic , Nuclear and so on but matter is not form of energy .
Matter has mass, so it is a form of energy.
 
I would say rather that matter has (a form of) energy, that we call rest energy.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 70 ·
3
Replies
70
Views
5K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
6K