Why is the square of the universal speed limit the amount of energy?
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: FREE: Subatomic Particle Mass/Stability Graph - No Interest?
Next: Why is the square of the universal speed limit the amount ofenergy?
From: rabid_fan on 1 May 2010 23:44 On Sat, 01 May 2010 19:52:25 -0700, BURT wrote: > > How can light have kinetic energy if it is a constant? C would mean all > the same energy for every light wave. And this clearly is not the truth. > Light (photons) has no mass, but it does have momentum: Momentum = p = Plank constant/wavelength = h/wl The energy of light, from quantum mechanics, is: Energy = h * frequency = h/wl * c Compare with the relativistic energy defined in terms of the momentum (p), with rest mass (m0) being zero for light: Energy = square root(m0^2 * c^4 - p^2 * c^2)
From: calvin on 2 May 2010 00:16 Why is a certain number of ergs equal to *exactly* a certain number of grams times *exactly* the square of a certain number of centimeters per second?
From: Y.Porat on 2 May 2010 02:44 On May 2, 1:17 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > E = MC Squared > > Why is mass related by the square of light speed? > > God chose this fundamental. ------------- equivalently as mass in Energy in macrocosm is related by c^2 --- E =1.2 m V^2 !! (Enrgy in macrocosm is started to be measured AND CALCULATED by summation in small steps from rest to maximum Integral from Zero to s -- (dp ds ) while in microcosm it does not start from zero --- IT IS ALWAYS THERE !!! in maximum speed BTW is it another copyright explanation of mine?? i wonder (:-) ATB Y.Porat --------------------------------------
From: Androcles on 2 May 2010 03:06 "calvin" <crice5(a)windstream.net> wrote in message news:904c03ee-55c6-490a-bccf-c39f60375f57(a)g21g2000yqk.googlegroups.com... > Why is a certain number of ergs equal to *exactly* > a certain number of grams times *exactly* the square > of a certain number of centimeters per second? For the same reason there are exactly 12 inches to a foot and 3 barleycorns to an inch, it is defined that way. One cannot say there are 5 toes to a foot; I can cut one off and it is still a foot, but if I cut an inch off a foot then it is no longer a foot, it is 11 inches. Why does bcd come after a, and pqr always precede s? Because we were taught that convention and we'll go on teaching our children that and similar conventions not because they have to be but because it is convenient to have everyone on the same wavelength. The qwerty keyboard is here to stay; questioning why won't change it, the child that wants it otherwise will be disadvantaged and you will be if you questions conventional definitions. Note that definitions are neither proof nor axioms, they are merely conventions to be stipulated to.
From: Sam Wormley on 2 May 2010 09:03
On 5/2/10 7:20 AM, bert wrote: > Einstein used the big number of light speed squared to show matter has > great energy. I do not think it need be 100% acurate. Still it > works,and stuff that works best not fix TreBert See: http://www.mathcs.emory.edu/~rudolf/E=mc%5E2.jpg |