What in the world does E =mc2 mean?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Matthias765
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mean
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Einstein's equation E=mc², which establishes the equivalence of mass and energy. It is confirmed that the energy obtainable from a mass m (in kilograms) is equal to m multiplied by 9 x 1016 m²/s². Participants clarify that energy can manifest in various forms, including gamma rays, and that the mass of an object can increase with temperature due to increased kinetic energy of its particles. The conversation also touches on the implications of relativistic mass and its relevance in particle physics, particularly in scenarios involving high-energy accelerators.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Einstein's theory of relativity
  • Familiarity with the concept of mass-energy equivalence
  • Knowledge of kinetic energy and its relation to temperature
  • Basic principles of particle physics and relativistic mass
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of E=mc² from the principles of special relativity
  • Explore the concept of relativistic mass and its implications in particle accelerators
  • Research the relationship between temperature and kinetic energy in thermodynamics
  • Examine the various forms of energy, including gamma rays and their properties
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators, and anyone interested in the fundamental concepts of mass-energy equivalence and its applications in modern physics.

  • #31
Aer said:
You are reiterating the concepts since abandoned by physicists. I am very aware that Einstein proposed relativistic mass long ago.
You asked for a reference; I provided one. No need to be so harsh.

Aer said:
And it is this situation (measuring acceleration in a single inertial reference frame) in which relativistic mass has any relevance.
You seem to be assuming that the only thing we care about is how the world looks to us as we accelerate. But what about how things look to us as we accelerate them, while we remain inertial? For instance, when we get particles moving close to the speed of light in particle accelerators, the concept of relativistic mass does have use to us then because we do have a single inertial reference frame with which to make the measurement. Why can't we put a charged particle in a strong enough magnetic field to accelerate it faster than the speed of light? A very simple explanation is that its relativistic mass increases as we accelerate it, so its inertia/resistance to acceleration increases as well.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
εllipse said:
You asked for a reference; I provided one. No need to be so harsh.

You seem to be assuming that the only thing we care about is how the world looks to us as we accelerate. But what about how things look to us as we accelerate them, while we remain inertial? For instance, when we get particles moving close to the speed of light in particle accelerators, the concept of relativistic mass does have use to us then because we do have a single inertial reference frame with which to make the measurement. Why can't we put a charged particle in a strong enough magnetic field to accelerate it faster than the speed of light? A very simple explanation is that its relativistic mass increases as we accelerate it, so its inertia/resistance to acceleration increases as well.
I've never said you cannot do this to obtain a correct result. However, it is not necessary to use relativistic mass to get the same thing, that is all I am saying. Relativistic mass is mearly a perception in other frames - however, too many people equate this perception to be actual mass accumulation to the object in the objects rest frame. This point of view is very wrong. It is just as easy to not use relativistic mass, but I'm not going to prohibit you from doing so.
 
  • #33
pmb_phy said:
Then as the gas is heated the particles move faster. The faster they move the greater the weight.
What is the weight of a particle (you may choose any particle you wish) moving .9999c through the atmosphere?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
8K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 63 ·
3
Replies
63
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K