Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Transformation mass -> energy vice versa

  1. Jan 16, 2009 #1
    Hello nice to meet all of you :smile:,

    Could use the E=m.c2 for the future transportation (like a warp) by converting our body into the energy, transport it ,and convert it again to mass in the reality? :confused:
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 16, 2009 #2


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Welcome. Nice to meet you too. :smile:

    In principle, yes. But I don't think you can recreate the same state (i.e. "you") at the destination. Also, once you have been destroyed, there's no need to send the energy anywhere. It would be easier to use matter that's already present at the destination to recreate you. For this to work, some information must be sent from the place where you were destroyed to the destination.
  4. Jan 17, 2009 #3
    Hmmmmm that's difficult but theoritically proven isn't? :rolleyes:

    Just made way to construct again our body, from energy to mass isnt?
    Someone have the idea? :confused:

    Ah there's another problem:

    In twin paradoks we know that the astronaut turns younger compared with people in earth.
    If someone enter to the particle accelerator and speed up the particle accelerator as fast as astronout spaceship, Can that people turns younger?
  5. Jan 17, 2009 #4


    Staff: Mentor

    Hi desert fox,

    IMO, the challenge isn't the conversion, it is simply the amount of information needed to recreate a body at the other end. Let's assume a standard 70 kg adult male composed entirely of water. Water is 18 g/mol, and contains 28 particles (protons, neutrons, and electrons) per molecule. That is a total of about 6.6E28 particles. Assuming only a classical 6 degrees of freedom per particle and single precision floating point representation that works out to about 1.3E31 bits of information. At just 50 nJ per bit that works out to 6.6E23 J just for the information itself. That is more than 1000 times the total world annual energy consumption, and at 50 nJ per bit you could probably transmit the information less than 1 km without corrupting too much of the data, even being optimistic.
  6. Jan 17, 2009 #5


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Welcome to PF!

    Hi desert fox! Welcome to PF! :smile:

    Moving very fast can't make you younger, it can only stop you (well, almost) getting older.

    Two problems though:

    i] the g-forces (acceleration) would be enormous unless the centrifuge was very large … acceleration = v2/r, and time delay = √(1 - v2/c2), so aceeleration = c2(1 - (time delay)2)/r

    ii] assuming you're inside the centrifuge, the outer wall and supporting structure of the centrifuge will be going even faster than you are (it might even have to go faster than light, which of course it can't), and will require tremendous energy and is extremely likely to break up! :smile:
  7. Jan 17, 2009 #6
    Re: Welcome to PF!

    Faster than light??? Please explained me
  8. Jan 18, 2009 #7
    Re: Welcome to PF!

    He said "you can't."
  9. Jan 18, 2009 #8


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I don't understand this question at all. (I don't understand it even after reading Tiny-Tim's answer, which I also don't understand. (What centrifuge?)). Can you explain what you meant, or at least ask the question in a less confusing way? How does a person enter a particle accelerator? One particle at a time? Is the particle accelerator moving or just the particle beam? Is there a spaceship involved in this scenario nor not? Younger than what?
  10. Jan 18, 2009 #9


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper


    Hi Fredrik! :smile:
    Yes, well that's why I assumed desert fox :smile: was using the word "accelerator" generically, as simply something that accelerates. :wink:
    Since astronauts can't be steered round a circle by using magnetic fields, I decided that the only practical "accelerators" would be mechanical.

    And I was worried about the astronaut getting too the near the walls, so I decided to have the walls rotating with him.

    That's a centrifuge! :biggrin:

    :wink: if you've a better plan :rolleyes:
  11. Jan 19, 2009 #10
    I just want to make the different approach than the einstein did. He use the spacetravel example to explain his twin paradoks theory. I want the the different approach, my idea is try to accelerates the astronout without the spaceship.
    The possible way to accelerates him/her is using the centrifuge force like the tiny-tim say.

    My objective is to create the possible mechanism using the twin paradoks theory without the help of the spaceship. I mean that "thing" is possible to be build in our earth.

    Anyone have the other idea?? :confused:
  12. Jan 19, 2009 #11


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    This experiment has been done with two atomic clocks serving as "twins," and one riding in an fast moving jet-plane. It's not that much difference (jet-plane instead of spaceship), but it is different.
  13. Jan 19, 2009 #12
    I don't want to challenge the theory it was proven like lurch say but

    One of the possible way i think by using the particle accelerator mechanism.
    But truly it's very difficult practically because required enourmous energy and it's instability.

    Someone have the other idea??? :confused:
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?