-4

So this is really just for fun. I often talk to my friend who studied some Physics degree (or similar) and he simply cannot accept the possibility it could be wrong in any way. To the point where he gets angry if I try to challenge it.

but if E=mc2, to me this implies that the speed of light itself is somehow controlling the amount of matter an object has. It seems mindboggling to me that it's a coincidence in nature, like what does the speed of light have to do with massive something is.

Also , is it 100% proven that in ALL circumstances/scenarios mass and energy values are directly linked, or have there been exceptions.

Finally (and off topic) that double slit test seems to me as prove that we don't understand even electrons behaviour fully (the conclusion that it will behave differently when it is being observed to when not observed doesn't sit well with me LOL!)

I'd love to hear any facts, opinions or discussion here. And of course would love to learn more and understand why this formula (and in fact the double slit thing) is so widely accepted by all experts.

(EDIT: THANKS FOR ALL COMMENTS AND ANSWERS)

Big T Larrity
  • 137

4 Answers4

5

The constant $c$ is largely arbitrary, mostly due to human definitions of things like the meter and the second (though we defined the speed of light to be an exact value in the 1980s, and the meter & second are now derived from it). In many cases, physicists use units in which $c=1$, so then you have that $$E=m$$ which should indicate that $c$ isn't controlling anything here, it's really just a value used to convert a mass-quantity into an energy-quantity.

You may want to look at other related questions and answers on the subject:

And probably many others.

Kyle Kanos
  • 29,127
1

When dealing with anything to do with the speed of light, I find it helpful to think of c not as a speed, but as a universal speed limit. So you can think of e=mc^2 because e=m(c+1)^2 is just impossible. C is just the highest number possible in the world of speed and therefore energy. It's just a way of thinking, but I hope it helps the understanding.

foolishmuse
  • 5,016
0

I like your question, you are taking from a different point of view. The equation is just a mathematical consequence of the postulates of Special Relativity, you can find it’s derivation in University Physics by Young. Actually the same result was found by Dirac through the postulates of Quantum Mechanics and again it was a mathematical consequence but he got a plus and minus sign in his equation. Your thinking is very keen and sharp but not needed in physics, Physics is about being humble to it and it’s laws. Hope it helps

-1

I like the E =mc^2 part of the question because I asked this in my school and my teacher was extremely pleased with me. So I will now try to answer the question.

Honestly though the double slit experiment has nothing to with it. Everyone should have a look at the single electron diffraction video. For example https://youtu.be/jvO0P5-SMxk. And I mean EVERYONE. The electron has simply a probability for falling at any point on the screen. Initially there are a few random pounts but as the numbers increase the inteference becomes obvious. There is no doubt whatsoever. Why nature behaves in this absurd ( to human minds) way is simply unknown. But it does and like Feynman I am delighted with it.

Now for the E=mc^2 issue. The speed of light is " not controlling the amount of matter an object has ". That formula determines how much energy is created when a mass m is converted into energy. This for example is happening in the sun. Once again experiments confirm it with no scope for any doubt

The formula itself emerges because Einstein asked a question. Light propagates as a wave. But Maxwell's equations don't change if the source is moving. So the velocity shouldn't change with the velocity of the source. This was subsequently directly verified. One of the consequences of this is the formula.

And before you ask, this is true in quantum mechanics too. But it becomes necessary to do a lot of maths.

NOTE FOR SERIOUS PHYSICISTS. I found through experience that this approach works better when explaining to non physicists rather than start a mathematical derivation from Michelson Morley experiment.

I have written a monograph "experimenting with the quantum world" published by vigyan prasar for such an audience. It can be down loaded from archives.org

Dr S T Lakshmikumar
  • 481