Would the energy be in if you used grams for mass and km/sec for c?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Someone502
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Grams Mass
AI Thread Summary
Using grams for mass and kilometers per second for the speed of light in energy calculations leads to joules, as the conversion factors cancel out. If using kilometers instead of meters, the energy would be expressed in kilojoules. The energy from 1 gram of mass, if fully converted, could power a 100-watt light bulb for an extensive duration, potentially up to 30,000 years. The discussion highlights the importance of unit consistency in physics, particularly in relation to Einstein's equation E=mc². Ultimately, converting units should maintain the integrity of the original equation to yield accurate results.
Someone502
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
What unit would the energy be in if you used grams for mass and km/sec for c?

And how many lights or something would 1 gram of the energy fuel (for comparision).

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
for kilograms, meters, and seconds, you would get joules. if you use kilometers instead of meters you would be getting kJ, since a kilometer is 1000m. If you use kilometers and grams, you would (I believe) be getting joules, since the "1000" conversion facor for meters -> kilometers and kilograms -> grams cancels.

Your second question can be answered by plugging in the mass in kilograms.
 
Look at the Joule, the standard unit of energy and see how your units relate.

Joule = \frac{m^2*kg}{s^2}
 
Someone502 said:
And how many lights or something would 1 gram of the energy fuel (for comparision).

It depends on how long you want to fuel them for. Lights require a certain amount of energy per second (in mks units, that's "watts") to stay alight. If 1 gram of mass energy were converted with 100% efficiency to power the light, then it could keep a 100-Watt light bulb going for 30,000 years (or 300 for 100 years)!
 
whozum said:
for kilograms, meters, and seconds, you would get joules. if you use kilometers instead of meters you would be getting kJ,

megaJoules

since a kilometer is 1000m. If you use kilometers and grams, you would (I believe) be getting joules, since the "1000" conversion facor for meters -> kilometers and kilograms -> grams cancels.

not quite. there is a square term in E = m c^2 for the kilometers that isn't there for kilograms or for Joules.

r b-j
 
Someone502 said:
What unit would the energy be in if you used grams for mass and km/sec for c?
Why change it? The equation was formulated in the gram/centimetre/second system. Just convert your kilometres to metres first.
 
Danger said:
Why change it?
The questioner appears to be asking for the purpose of understanding what happens when certain things are done. In this case it pertains to units.
The equation was formulated in the gram/centimetre/second system. Just convert your kilometres to metres first.
The equation was not formulated in terms of any units whatsoever.

Pete
 
pmb_phy said:
The questioner appears to be asking for the purpose of understanding what happens when certain things are done. In this case it pertains to units.
Sorry; I misunderstood the question.

pmb_phy said:
The equation was not formulated in terms of any units whatsoever.
Perhaps a poor choice of words on my part; when Einstein first used it, those were the units that he employed. You couldn't arbitrarily change it to energy in dynes, mass in metric tonnes, and speed in rods per hour and still get a reasonable result.
 
Back
Top