What Led Einstein to Connect Light and the Speed of C to E?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter halpmaine
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the motivations and historical context that led Einstein to connect the speed of light (C) with mass-energy equivalence (E). Participants explore the mathematical and theoretical foundations of this relationship, including references to electromagnetism and the postulates of relativity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Historical
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions what prompted Einstein to consider light as integral to mass-energy equivalence, suggesting a mathematical approach where C could be seen as an unknown variable.
  • Another participant states that Einstein was motivated by electromagnetism and Maxwell's equations.
  • It is noted that the mass-energy equivalence emerged from the mathematics, particularly due to the implications of a constant speed of light and its contradiction with the Galilean Principle of Relativity.
  • One participant explains that the Lorentz transformation can be derived from the postulates of relativity, leading to expressions for relativistic momentum and kinetic energy.
  • Another participant emphasizes that historically, several physicists were seeking an invariant transformation for Maxwell's equations, which led to the Lorentz transformation, and that Einstein's postulates were added later.
  • A participant clarifies that while the historical development may differ, the logical derivation of the concepts can still be valid.
  • One participant asserts that the speed of light was integral to Einstein's theory from the beginning, linking it to the propagation of electric and magnetic fields and the relationship between energy and mass.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the historical development of Einstein's theories and the motivations behind his connection of light and mass-energy equivalence. There is no consensus on the exact nature of these motivations or the historical sequence of ideas.

Contextual Notes

Some claims rely on interpretations of historical events and the derivation of physical laws, which may not be universally accepted. The discussion reflects various perspectives on the relationship between electromagnetism, relativity, and the formulation of mass-energy equivalence.

halpmaine
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Hello All.

Please forgive me if the answer to the following is found in PF but I didn't find it doing a search...

My question is this: what prompted Einstein to even consider light or better C as integral to E or, well, 'everything'? Was it mathematical such that he had the E and m but not the unknown variable (i.e. x = ?); was C the result of solving for x, if you will?

Thanks!

-Halp
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Einstein was motivated by electromagnetism (Maxwell's Equations).
 
My understanding is that the mass-energy equivalence was an implication that fell out of the math. But the motivation for the theory started with implications of a constant speed of light from Maxwell's equations and it's logical contradiction with the Galilean Principle of Relativity.
 
halpmaine said:
Hello All.

Please forgive me if the answer to the following is found in PF but I didn't find it doing a search...

My question is this: what prompted Einstein to even consider light or better C as integral to E or, well, 'everything'? Was it mathematical such that he had the E and m but not the unknown variable (i.e. x = ?); was C the result of solving for x, if you will?

Thanks!

-Halp
It all followed from the postulates of relativity. The Lorentz transformation can be derived from the postulates (and then we can get the velocity addition formula), and you can derive the relativistic expression for momentum from this. Once you have this expression, getting an expression for kinetic energy becomes a simple calculus exercise:
$$K.E.=\int F ds = \int v d(\gamma m_0 v)$$
Just use integration by parts and substitute the appropriate limits and you get ##K.E.=(\gamma -1) m_0 c^2##. Some rearrangement shows that even if the kinetic energy of the object was decreased to 0, it would still possesses some rest energy ##E=m_0 c^2##, and this is what is required. ALL of relativity follows from the two postulates.
 
PWiz said:
It all followed from the postulates of relativity. The Lorentz transformation can be derived from the postulates

But historically that is not what happened. Several physicists were trying to find an invariant transformation for Maxwell's equations. And what they found was the Lorentz transformation. The postulates of relativity were added by Einstein a posteriori.

Here is a blog post on how Einstein derived ##E = mc^2##:

https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2007/12/28/einsteins-derivation-of-emc2/

Not sure if that really accurate, but at least it sounds plausible.
 
Smattering said:
But historically that is not what happened.
I know, but the historical way is not always the most convenient/logical way to understand things. Also note that I originally said "can be derived" instead of "was derived".
 
halpmaine said:
My question is this: what prompted Einstein to even consider light or better C as integral to E or, well, 'everything'?

The speed of light was an integral part of the formulation of his theory from the very beginning. It's the speed of propagation of electric and magnetic fields. It was his consideration of the relationship between electric and magnetic fields that led him to formulate his theory. The relationship between energy and mass was a part of that theory that followed from those considerations.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
10K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
6K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K