e=mc2
Le Van Cuong

Hanoi, Vietnam

#21 Dec 31, 2007
By the way, I want warning that many countries use nuclear power, i.e. there are many nuclear reactor, the nuclear particles are accelerated to hight velocity enough to change its mass, space and time. This means that the formula for the energy of a frame moving with extreme velocity: E=m.c2 must be calculated and it is very dangerous to use Einstein's mistaken formula for calculation. Please read this at http://www.wbabin.net/science/cuong2.pdf and http://www.wbabin.net/science/cuong11.pdf
Le Van Cuong

Hanoi, Vietnam

#22 Jan 1, 2008
By the way, I want warning that many countries use nuclear power, i.e. there are many nuclear reactors. In a nuclear reactor, the nuclear particles are accelerated to hight velocity,(high temperature) enough to change its mass, space and time. This means that the formula for the energy of a frame moving with extreme velocity: E=m.c2 must be calculated and it is very dangerous to use Einstein's mistaken formula for calculation. Please read this at http://www.wbabin.net/science/cuong2.pdf and http://www.wbabin.net/science/cuong11.pdf
PeweHerMan

Pompano Beach, FL

#23 Feb 18, 2008
wow u guys are such freaking geniuses i odnt eve get halve the words in this forun!!
Gordon

Gosport, UK

#24 Mar 13, 2008
TruthWalker wrote:
e=mc2
What does the m stand for? matter or mass?
And what does the c2 mean?
Thanks
M is MASS (measured in kilograms)
E is ENERGY (measured in joules)
c is the speed of light (300 000 000 metres per second)
Gordon

Gosport, UK

#25 Mar 13, 2008
M is MASS (measured in kilograms)

E is ENERGY (measured in joules)

c is the speed of light (300 000 000 metres per second)

So one kilogram of mass has an energy equivalent to 1 x 300 000 000 x 300 000 000 joules, which is 90 000 000 000 000 000 joules!
Simple-ton

Gridley, CA

#26 Apr 4, 2008
Ok guys this subject has me fascinated, though I am not schooled in advanced mathematics I am very good in understanding mechanically. I know this probably isn't precise but tell me if I am in the ball park. As far as an example of the compounding amounts of energy needed to increase the velocity of a specific mass be crudely compared with a man riding a bicycle with multiple gear ratios. The faster the man is able to move himself along the more energy is required to be applied to the cranks due to the gear ratio being used. As the man speeds up he can change gears however the higher the gear ratio then the more force or work is required to move his mass along. Theoretically speaking to reach the speed of light would become impossible because as he is speeding up his mass speed to work ratio is altered as his mass increases keeping the speed of light always just out of reach?

Did I explain myself correctly? I been reading this and another site that's been trying to break it down for those of us who don't have a background in advanced mathematics.

I was just wondering if I am close to understanding the basic theory.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#27 Apr 5, 2008
Simple-ton wrote:
Ok guys this subject has me fascinated, though I am not schooled in advanced mathematics I am very good in understanding mechanically. I know this probably isn't precise but tell me if I am in the ball park. As far as an example of the compounding amounts of energy needed to increase the velocity of a specific mass be crudely compared with a man riding a bicycle with multiple gear ratios. The faster the man is able to move himself along the more energy is required to be applied to the cranks due to the gear ratio being used. As the man speeds up he can change gears however the higher the gear ratio then the more force or work is required to move his mass along. Theoretically speaking to reach the speed of light would become impossible because as he is speeding up his mass speed to work ratio is altered as his mass increases keeping the speed of light always just out of reach?
Did I explain myself correctly? I been reading this and another site that's been trying to break it down for those of us who don't have a background in advanced mathematics.
I was just wondering if I am close to understanding the basic theory.
Not a bad analogy as far as it goes.

Kinetic energy, classically, is given by 1/2mv^2. So, if you double the velocity, you have 4 times the kinetic energy. Thus it would take 1 unit of energy to reach a speed of 1. It would take an additional 3 units of energy to go from a speed of 1 to a speed of 2.

Then, under relativistic conditions, you also have the mass of the object increasing as it speeds up. This is going to have very little effect until you reach a substantial fraction of the speed of light. Using relativistic effects, it would take an infinite amount of energy to propel a mass at the speed of light.

Some good references on the physics, if you are interested. Isaac Asimov's "Guide to Science" and "Understanding Physics" will give you a simple explanation of the basics. Stephen Hawking's "A Brief History of Time" has some good chapters on relativity that go into the subject a bit deeper.
Simple-ton

Chico, CA

#28 Apr 12, 2008
Yes, thank you. I don't know why I wasn't interested in this stuff when I was a teen. I was interested when I was a kid, then for some reason I lost some (not all but some)interest from age 14-20 then I regained my interest after that but then had little opportunity to explore it and now I am late 30's with a little more opportunity so I have been trying to make up for lost time. lol. Thanks for the references and the explanations. I like to bring a fresh perspective to things in my life. I am also a firm believer in that complex problems can sometimes be solved with simple answers that would be easily overlooked because of their simplicity, so while I learn new things I try to stay grounded.
Anyways thanks again.:)
orca

Wellington, New Zealand

#29 Jul 1, 2008
The formula E = mc^2 means the energy confined in mass m is mc^2.
Consider how much energy is confined in a 1kg brick:
it is 1*300,000^2J = 30,000,000,000.
The reality is that we can not use this energy because we can not release it.
45gem88

Riverhead, NY

#30 Sep 18, 2008
the c2 stands 4 the speed of light and the m stands 4 mass
DammitDewd

Mcloud, OK

#31 Dec 30, 2008
bikaram kumar wrote:
I am bikram from delhi now i am doing bca from smu
I think that's just peachy from Georgia.
DammitDewd

Mcloud, OK

#32 Dec 30, 2008
TruthWalker wrote:
<quoted text>
What exactly does 1 mean? Explain it to me.
I'll take this one. "1" means; one man and one woman gets it on and makes 1.
Apex Mom

Raleigh, NC

#39 Jun 18, 2009
Simple-ton wrote:
Ok guys this subject has me fascinated, though I am not schooled in advanced mathematics I am very good in understanding mechanically. I know this probably isn't precise but tell me if I am in the ball park. As far as an example of the compounding amounts of energy needed to increase the velocity of a specific mass be crudely compared with a man riding a bicycle with multiple gear ratios. The faster the man is able to move himself along the more energy is required to be applied to the cranks due to the gear ratio being used. As the man speeds up he can change gears however the higher the gear ratio then the more force or work is required to move his mass along. Theoretically speaking to reach the speed of light would become impossible because as he is speeding up his mass speed to work ratio is altered as his mass increases keeping the speed of light always just out of reach?
Did I explain myself correctly? I been reading this and another site that's been trying to break it down for those of us who don't have a background in advanced mathematics.
I was just wondering if I am close to understanding the basic theory.
Very impressed with your interpretation. Pretty darn close from what I've gathered. Not that I know all the in-and-outs. But I am fascinated by this stuff. Read all of Michio Kaku's books, Stephen Hawking "Brief History Of Time". They are great books for those like us. They try and put it in layman's terms. By the end I'm always still lost but nevertheless profoundly amazed. I do have some advanced math. 4 advanced calculus classes in college, and got A's in all. But I've pretty much wiped that information from my "hard drive". The more SCI channel and more books you read the more it makes sense.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#40 Jun 21, 2009
orca wrote:
The formula E = mc^2 means the energy confined in mass m is mc^2.
Consider how much energy is confined in a 1kg brick:
it is 1*300,000^2J = 30,000,000,000.
The reality is that we can not use this energy because we can not release it.
Ummm...That happens to be exactly what happens in a nuclear reaction...mass is converted to energy. So your claim that we can never use it is false.

BTW...your calculation is off. Joules are kg*m^2/sec^2. You used the measurement of the speed of light in kilometers/sec. You are off by a factor of 1,000,000. 1 kg produces 30,000,000,000,000,000 joules of energy.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#41 Jun 21, 2009
Apex Mom wrote:
<quoted text>
Very impressed with your interpretation. Pretty darn close from what I've gathered. Not that I know all the in-and-outs. But I am fascinated by this stuff. Read all of Michio Kaku's books, Stephen Hawking "Brief History Of Time". They are great books for those like us. They try and put it in layman's terms. By the end I'm always still lost but nevertheless profoundly amazed. I do have some advanced math. 4 advanced calculus classes in college, and got A's in all. But I've pretty much wiped that information from my "hard drive". The more SCI channel and more books you read the more it makes sense.
If you liked Brief History of Time, you would probably like Hawking's Universe in a Nutshell. It is, more or less, Brief History updated by about 15 or 20 years.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#42 Jun 21, 2009
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Ummm...That happens to be exactly what happens in a nuclear reaction...mass is converted to energy. So your claim that we can never use it is false.
BTW...your calculation is off. Joules are kg*m^2/sec^2. You used the measurement of the speed of light in kilometers/sec. You are off by a factor of 1,000,000. 1 kg produces 30,000,000,000,000,000 joules of energy.
Oops...right...that's supposed to be a ***NINE*** at the front, not a 3.
Apex Mom

Raleigh, NC

#43 Jun 22, 2009
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
If you liked Brief History of Time, you would probably like Hawking's Universe in a Nutshell. It is, more or less, Brief History updated by about 15 or 20 years.
Thanks! I'll definitely check that out. I'd not heard of that one.
andrew j langham

UK

#44 Jan 28, 2010
the sun takes in vast amounts of free energy from space! this vast one way tide towards the sun,
of said photon debris that has mass creates gravity which people always previously thought of as a pulling force; which it is not, the sun however therefore receives photons from outer space containing mass then uses the same ensembled photons, then shedding this mass, the sun has then gained this said received energy and then re-radiates same said photons that now, have shedded mass and have become ie light photons which we receive as sunlight on our planet earth,;
note; gravity is a pushing force; andrewlangham@yahoo.co.uk
andrew j langham

UK

#46 Mar 21, 2010
energy = the sum product of the photon 'mass per metre cubed' x the mean average of all photons within a mean average sampled cubed metre, x the cosmological total volume constant; which is 1 cubed metre x infinity; the cosmos is a perceived infinity in relation to human contiousness and is an energy exchange medium and is a presented complex photon matrix of excellence given to humans and is sign of total greatness and wonderous glory from ALMIGHTY GOD/ALLAH
andrew j langham

UK

#47 Mar 21, 2010
energy = the sum product of the photon 'mass per metre cubed' x the mean average of all photons within a mean average sampled cubed metre, x the cosmological total volume constant; which is 1 cubed metre x infinity; the cosmos is a perceived infinity in relation to human consciousness and is an energy exchange medium and is a presented complex photon matrix of excellence given to humans and is sign of total greatness and wondrous glory from ALMIGHTY GOD/ALLAH

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Physics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Neutron anomaly might point to dark matter Sat TimGMeloche 1
News Quantum gravity could be probed by entangled ma... Jan 16 TimGMeloche 1
Gravity Hill, PA-Defying the Law of Physics Jan 11 Stephen 1
Baseball vs Tennis Ball (Jan '07) Nov '17 Ben 20
better safer ways of producing clean energy for... (Feb '17) Nov '17 discountbrains 2
News Einstein's handwritten notes sell for $1.8M Oct '17 Pardon Pard 12
News Solar Energy: Prototype Shows How Tiny Photodet... Oct '17 Solarman 1
More from around the web