Physical Explanation for E=mc^2
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
Next: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely youcan't be serious.
From: bert on 13 Feb 2010 12:49 On Feb 13, 11:14 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 13, 9:34 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 13, 8:41 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > 'DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT? By A. > > > EINSTEIN'http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf > > > > "If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass > > > diminishes by L/c2." > > > > The mass of the body does diminish, but the matter which no longer > > > exists as part of the body has not vanished. It still exists, as > > > aether. As the matter transitions to aether it expands in three > > > dimensions. The effect this transition has on the surrounding aether > > > and matter is energy. > > > > The effects of the newly released aether is energy. Think nuclear > > > fission and fusion. The energy given off in nuclear fission and fusion > > > reactions is the effect matter transitioning to aether has on the > > > matter and aether in neighboring places. > > > Funny, but quantum theory explains these things quite well without > > ever remotely mentioning your silly aether. > > Energy is the effect matter transitioning to aether has on the > surrounding matter and aether. > > I take it when you think of E=mc^2 you are probably thinking the > matter 'converts' to energy? What happened to the mass associated with > the matter? Did it disappear? And if you say matter 'becomes' energy > then you still have the same issue of what happened to the mass > because energy is mass-less. > > So, in E=mc^2, what happens to the mass? > > In quantum theory, in nuclear fission and nuclear fusion, when energy > is created, is there more, less, or the same amount of mass in > existence in the universe? > > If there is more or the same what does it exist as? > > In AD, the mass still exists, as aether.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - mpc Space is just all there is in both micro and macro realms. Reality is there is more space from electron to atom nucleas than most objects in the macro world. We must always keep this picture up front when we visualize the universe. TreBert
From: PD on 13 Feb 2010 14:29 On Feb 13, 10:14 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 13, 9:34 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 13, 8:41 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > 'DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT? By A. > > > EINSTEIN'http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf > > > > "If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass > > > diminishes by L/c2." > > > > The mass of the body does diminish, but the matter which no longer > > > exists as part of the body has not vanished. It still exists, as > > > aether. As the matter transitions to aether it expands in three > > > dimensions. The effect this transition has on the surrounding aether > > > and matter is energy. > > > > The effects of the newly released aether is energy. Think nuclear > > > fission and fusion. The energy given off in nuclear fission and fusion > > > reactions is the effect matter transitioning to aether has on the > > > matter and aether in neighboring places. > > > Funny, but quantum theory explains these things quite well without > > ever remotely mentioning your silly aether. > > Energy is the effect matter transitioning to aether has on the > surrounding matter and aether. > > I take it when you think of E=mc^2 you are probably thinking the > matter 'converts' to energy? What happened to the mass associated with > the matter? Did it disappear? Yes. That's what mass-energy conversion MEANS. Mass becomes energy and is no longer mass. There is no law of nature that says matter is conserved. Mass is a *measurable* quantity. If you measure a system's mass, and some of it is converted into energy, you can *measure* the difference by measuring the mass again and SEEING that it no longer the same number as before. That is, you can SEE with your very own eyes that mass is not a conserved quantity. You don't have to lie to yourself that the mass is still there but hidden somewhere, and invent some stupid aether just to have some place to hide it. > And if you say matter 'becomes' energy > then you still have the same issue of what happened to the mass > because energy is mass-less. > > So, in E=mc^2, what happens to the mass? > > In quantum theory, in nuclear fission and nuclear fusion, when energy > is created, is there more, less, or the same amount of mass in > existence in the universe? > > If there is more or the same what does it exist as? > > In AD, the mass still exists, as aether.
From: PD on 13 Feb 2010 14:31 On Feb 13, 7:41 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > 'DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT? By A. > EINSTEIN'http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf > > "If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass > diminishes by L/c2." > > The mass of the body does diminish, but the matter which no longer > exists as part of the body has not vanished. It certainly escapes measurement. Mass is *measurable*. Do you need a place to hide matter so that it escapes measurement but where you can still choose to believe it still exists? > It still exists, as > aether. As the matter transitions to aether it expands in three > dimensions. The effect this transition has on the surrounding aether > and matter is energy. > > The effects of the newly released aether is energy. Think nuclear > fission and fusion. The energy given off in nuclear fission and fusion > reactions is the effect matter transitioning to aether has on the > matter and aether in neighboring places.
From: mpc755 on 13 Feb 2010 15:06 On Feb 13, 2:29 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 13, 10:14 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 13, 9:34 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > On Feb 13, 8:41 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > 'DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT? By A. > > > > EINSTEIN'http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf > > > > > "If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass > > > > diminishes by L/c2." > > > > > The mass of the body does diminish, but the matter which no longer > > > > exists as part of the body has not vanished. It still exists, as > > > > aether. As the matter transitions to aether it expands in three > > > > dimensions. The effect this transition has on the surrounding aether > > > > and matter is energy. > > > > > The effects of the newly released aether is energy. Think nuclear > > > > fission and fusion. The energy given off in nuclear fission and fusion > > > > reactions is the effect matter transitioning to aether has on the > > > > matter and aether in neighboring places. > > > > Funny, but quantum theory explains these things quite well without > > > ever remotely mentioning your silly aether. > > > Energy is the effect matter transitioning to aether has on the > > surrounding matter and aether. > > > I take it when you think of E=mc^2 you are probably thinking the > > matter 'converts' to energy? What happened to the mass associated with > > the matter? Did it disappear? > > Yes. That's what mass-energy conversion MEANS. Mass becomes energy and > is no longer mass. > > There is no law of nature that says matter is conserved. > > Mass is a *measurable* quantity. If you measure a system's mass, and > some of it is converted into energy, you can *measure* the difference > by measuring the mass again and SEEING that it no longer the same > number as before. That is, you can SEE with your very own eyes that > mass is not a conserved quantity. You don't have to lie to yourself > that the mass is still there but hidden somewhere, and invent some > stupid aether just to have some place to hide it. > When you say you measure a system's mass you are not taking into account the aether which exists within and outside of the system. When matter is converted to energy the mass of the system is less but the overall mass in existence in the universe remains the same.
From: BURT on 13 Feb 2010 15:12
On Feb 13, 12:06 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 13, 2:29 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 13, 10:14 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Feb 13, 9:34 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 13, 8:41 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > 'DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT? By A. > > > > > EINSTEIN'http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf > > > > > > "If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass > > > > > diminishes by L/c2." > > > > > > The mass of the body does diminish, but the matter which no longer > > > > > exists as part of the body has not vanished. It still exists, as > > > > > aether. As the matter transitions to aether it expands in three > > > > > dimensions. The effect this transition has on the surrounding aether > > > > > and matter is energy. > > > > > > The effects of the newly released aether is energy. Think nuclear > > > > > fission and fusion. The energy given off in nuclear fission and fusion > > > > > reactions is the effect matter transitioning to aether has on the > > > > > matter and aether in neighboring places. > > > > > Funny, but quantum theory explains these things quite well without > > > > ever remotely mentioning your silly aether. > > > > Energy is the effect matter transitioning to aether has on the > > > surrounding matter and aether. > > > > I take it when you think of E=mc^2 you are probably thinking the > > > matter 'converts' to energy? What happened to the mass associated with > > > the matter? Did it disappear? > > > Yes. That's what mass-energy conversion MEANS. Mass becomes energy and > > is no longer mass. > > > There is no law of nature that says matter is conserved. > > > Mass is a *measurable* quantity. If you measure a system's mass, and > > some of it is converted into energy, you can *measure* the difference > > by measuring the mass again and SEEING that it no longer the same > > number as before. That is, you can SEE with your very own eyes that > > mass is not a conserved quantity. You don't have to lie to yourself > > that the mass is still there but hidden somewhere, and invent some > > stupid aether just to have some place to hide it. > > When you say you measure a system's mass you are not taking into > account the aether which exists within and outside of the system. When > matter is converted to energy the mass of the system is less but the > overall mass in existence in the universe remains the same.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Kinetic energy is mass. |