 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Physics / Relativity / October 2006Past, present and future of E=mc2: A CRITICAL DISCUSSION
Past, present and future of E=mc2: A CRITICAL DISCUSSION The link with detailed discussion (i) How and When E=mc2 was derived ? (ii) What are conditions of derivation ? (iii) What is justification of dE =Ac2dm ? and FAQs on the topic kindly see link http://www.sulekha.com/blogs/blogdisplay.aspx?contributor=physicsajay > Past, present and future of E=mc2: A CRITICAL DISCUSSION Kooky discussion is more like it. > The link with detailed discussion > (i) How and When E=mc2 was derived ? Who cares? It is easy to derive rigorously, regardless of whatever ancient derivation you are using for a strawman. >> Past, present and future of E=mc2: A CRITICAL DISCUSSION > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Who cares? It is easy to derive rigorously, regardless of whatever > ancient derivation you are using for a strawman. Indeed. And very elegantly at that using the only reasonable lagrangian for a free particle. Thanks Bill > Past, present and future of E=mc2: A CRITICAL DISCUSSION > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://www.sulekha.com/blogs/blogdisplay.aspx?contributor=physicsajay You received an interesting answer to your thread here: http://www.sulekha.com/blogs/blogdisplay.aspx?contributor=macactupapi Hello my name is Conrad At the risk of putting myself in the line of fire which can only be a test worth taking if my theory is to hold up, I'd like to present another point of view for everyone to review See this: concerning E=mc^2 http://www.cjc123.net/review.htm Would appreciate response from anyone positive or negative Thank you Conrad | Hello my name is Conrad | At the risk of putting myself in the line of fire which can only be a [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] | Thank you | Conrad http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/E^2/En.gif KE = 1/2mv^2 Oh dear, v is squared. How do you explain that? > | Hello my name is Conrad > | At the risk of putting myself in the line of fire which can only be a [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > KE = 1/2mv^2 > Oh dear, v is squared. How do you explain that? Hi this is Conrad I think that the equation you use refers to Kenetic energy of rest mass and sence the most basic form of rest mass as far as I know is the electron which makes two rotations to comeplete one wave cycle, the rest mass concerning the electron can be broken down this way: Energy that reaches a frequency where the angular momentum equals and balences the momentum along the forward path for a balence of centrifugal and centripital forces results in a closed circuit of energy. The equation for circular motion is a=v^2/r meaning acceleration equals velocity squared devided by the radius in classical physics. Its velocity is said to be squard and the result of a cetrifugal and centripital force balence. If an electrons wave cycle is considered a wave cycle folded in two, as it is by some spin 1/2, its velocity can be said to be squaared and than cut in half. Thus 1/2mv^2 in the rest mass formula for kenetic energy. Even an eliptiacal orbit such as a planets is sometimes refered to as having a velocity squared even though its velocity is not uniform still its aaverage velocity is uniform idealy and so can the wave cycle of an electron if viewed this way. Conrad | > | Hello my name is Conrad | > | At the risk of putting myself in the line of fire which can only be a [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] | Hi this is Conrad | I think that the equation you use refers to Kenetic energy of rest mass Hi, this is Androcles. You are an idiot, cannonballs do not have kinetic energy when at rest. > | > | Hello my name is Conrad > | > | At the risk of putting myself in the line of fire which can only be a [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Hi, this is Androcles. > You are an idiot, cannonballs do not have kinetic energy when at rest. Hi this is Conrad Androcles- why so rude? Just listen to this new perspective I meant that the formular you used refers to the kenetic energy of something with rest mass if it does move. Electromagnetic energy which does not have rest mass is not measured in this way it is measured E=hf/c^2 most times.or M=Ec^2 and E=mc^2 as m and E are equivalent. There is no 1/2 Ec^2 or 1/2mc^2 here. And as I will also demonstrate rest mass is kinetic energy in circulating motion for a more equaly distributed energy, mass ,and momentum around a center of rotation. This is what gives it stibility in motion and a helicpter like hover effect that enables rest mass. This is exactly why (m) or rest mass = (E) or energy (c^2) at the velocity of light squared for one quantum particle which would be in a closed circiut of motion when the frequency speed and momentum of electromagnetism reaches c in the angular direction and balences the momentum and speed along the forward path resulting in a balence of centrifugal and centripital forces and a close loop circiut of energy. This is exactly why energy and matter are equvalent at c^2. c^2 is not just a mathmatical conversion factor of energy and matter, it is an actual frequency at the high end of the eklectromagnetic specrum and has a geometrical configuration of energy in a closed loop circiut. This is my discovery and the evidence is piling up so much that i am willing to argue this with anyone. There is no way around it. Conrad | > | > | Hello my name is Conrad | > | > | At the risk of putting myself in the line of fire which can only be a [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] | Hi this is Conrad | Androcles- why so rude? You wanted a critical discussion, I'm criticizing you. "Would appreciate response from anyone positive or negative" - Conrad the barbarian. Why so ungrateful? | Just listen to this new perspective | I meant that the formular you used refers to the kenetic energy of | something with rest mass if it does move. That's called "mass", Rest Conrad. | Electromagnetic energy which | does not have rest mass is not measured in this way it is measured | E=hf/c^2 most times. Nonsense, Rest Conrad. You are babbling. Androcles Hello this is Conrad O.K. I can take the critisism Let me make it plain and simple. Until now I have only heard of c^2 as being a mathmatical conversion factor between energy and matter. I am adding another dimension to this that is so simple that I wondered why nobody has thought of it before at least as far as I know. And as such some people may be kicking themselve because of this. But the other demension metiphoricaly speaking anyways, is the geometrical aspect of c^2 as energy in a closed circuit rotation at the high end of the electromagnetic spectrum where the frequency speed and momentum equals and balances the speed and momentum of the energy along the light path, for a balence of centrifugal and centripital forces resulting in a closed loop of rotating energy. Its that simple. What don't you understand? Many scientist when asked what does E=mc^2 mean to them say that energy and matter are equivalent and that a tremendous amount of energy is traped inside of matter. This geometrical description that I offer tells us exactly how energy and matter are equivalent and how it gets traped. The angular frequency speed and momentum of the energy balences the forward speed and momentum creating a closed circuit loop of energy caught in the warp of space - time. Can you picture that? !00 years of E=mc^2 and what does it mean? Well add that to it. Conrad | Hello this is Conrad | | O.K. I can take the critisism | Let me make it plain and simple. Until now I have only heard of c^2 as | being a mathmatical conversion factor between energy and matter. Ok, well, it is. If you can understand what E = 1/2 mv^2 means, then read this: http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/E^2/EnergySquare.htm | I am | adding another dimension to this that is so simple that I wondered why | nobody has thought of it before at least as far as I know. But they have, and long before Idiot Einstein. The sun depends on it, as do atomic bombs. The question is, WHAT is mass? | And as such | some people may be kicking themselve because of this. Not me. The answer is obvious. | But the other | demension metiphoricaly speaking anyways, is the geometrical aspect of [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] | closed loop of rotating energy. Its that simple. What don't you | understand? Nothing, it was gobbledegook. Put it in equations and then I might understand what it is you are trying to say. Another point: use English, "demension" is not "dimension" and "metiphoricaly " is not "metaphorically". A quick guide to a kook is his inability to spell or punctuate. "It's" means "it is", "its" means "belonging to". | Many scientist when asked what does E=mc^2 mean to them say that energy | and matter are equivalent and that a tremendous amount of energy is | traped inside of matter. I'm not "many scientist". I am *a* scientist. You are talking to *me*. | This geometrical description that I offer | tells us exactly how energy and matter are equivalent and how it gets | traped. Traped? What the f.ck is "traped"? At least get a spelling checker, this is becoming impossible to decipher. If you have an idea use the tools at your disposal to express it. Else it will be ignored. The angular frequency speed and momentum of the energy balences <groan> "balances" | the forward speed and momentum creating a closed circuit loop of energy | caught in the warp of space - time. Can you picture that? No. I have no idea what you mean by "angular frequency speed", it is gobbledegook. | !00 years of E=mc^2 and what does it mean? Well add that to it. Conrad Rest Conrad, use plain English. K.I.S.S. = Keep It Simple, Stupid. Androcles Hello Androcles this is Conrad Its easy to take criticism when you know your right and so I don't mind taking yours. I apologizer for the type o's if they confused you but you seemed to have interpreted them correctly. The problem is you haven't interpreted my theory correctly or perhaps you have and you are afraid. Afraid that my idea is not only correct but in direct opposition to yours. Perhaps you have a lot of time, pride ,and money invested in it and you are afraid that - well need I go on? I do not want to step on anyones toes here by putting their grants and livelihood in jeopardy but my mission is the discovery of truth in physics and to put it in it's simplest form and that is what I think I have partially achieved. The evidence will speak for itself and with that I rest my case as far as you are concerned. Thank You Conrad I really would like a response from the initiator of this discussion Mr. AJAY SHARMA who said in discussion: 100 years of E=mc2 "Einstein earlier derived L = mc2 (light energy mass conversion equation). Then Einstein speculated that what is true for light energy (L) the same is true for every energy (E). This speculation results in E=mc2, such a significant equation must be based upon a specific mathematical derivation and not on speculation." Not to criticize but to discuss that: According to Novas scientific program: "Einstein's Big Idea", on air and on line" in the descriptions of E=mc2 given by Frank Wilczek, Theoretical Physicist, MIT and Sheldon Glashow, Theoretical Physicist, Boston University, Einstein's original formula was M=e/c2. Ten physicist were ask to explain E=mc2 in their own words for the 100th anniversary of Einstein's formula which they gave and you can see at http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/einstein/experts.html. Now let me add one more radical explanation. The simplest way to see the direct relationship between energy and matter is to view the formula m=Ec2 in this way. [ m (or rest mass) = E (or energy) c^2(at the speed of light in circular rotation) for one quantum particle.] Just as v^2 in formula a=v^2/r represents acceleration of circular motion in classical physics so can c^2 represent circular motion for one quantum particle if viewed in this way. Please observe! "The speed of light squared or c^2" might be said to be ( the vector product of two perpendicular vectors of motion), namely the speed of light along the linear light path, for instance horizontally along the x-axis - and the speed of light in the right angular frequency direction, or vertically along the y-axis; resulting in a balance of centrifugal and centripetal forces to yield circular motion and rest mass. In 3D this would be a standing spherical wave. And this wave may have rest mass due to a helicopter like hovering effect and stability in motion because of a more equal distribution of energy, mass, and momentum around a center of rotation instead of energy being radiated outward in a relatively straight line as with normal electromagnetic radiation. Conrad J Countess See this site for a more graphical and logical description http://www.cjc123.net/review.htm Hello this is Conrad This site is from Androcles. It gives a geometrical description of v^2 and c^2 which I find very interesting. http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/E^2/EnergySquare.htm (you must cut and paste) 1.First it does substitute c^2 for v^2 in equation like mine but uses a square instead of a circle to represent the energy involved. This is understandable sense it is called v and c squared and not v or c circled (a name I sometimes call it). The circle as I use it represent path of energy as the velocity continually changes and is v^2 or c^2. 2.The Pythagorean theorem is also used a lot, "a^2 + b^2 = c^2" as it is in mine. They take E=mc^2 and extend it to "E^2 = m^2 c^4" and beyond. I use it to show that a wave that makes two rotations to complete one wave cycle, such as that of an electron, the most basic rest mass particle; can be represented by this Pythagorean theorem. For instance, if one takes a Isosceles triangle with two straight right angular lines they can represent the two rotations, (a^2+b^2) of the wave trajectory if the velocity were squared (round) and would be equal to the one slanted angular trajectory (c^2),if that velocity were squared (circled). Imagine the hypotenuse of the triangle representing a trajectory where the wave travels the same distance at the same time in both horizontal and vertical direction resulting more in a 90% arc instead of a 90% straight line and circular motion if this trajectory were to be constant. It would be the vector product of two perpendicular vectors of motion, a centrifugal and centripetal force that results in circular motion. 3.The third thing that I find extremely interesting is that you can take the velocity of a quantity of rest mass such as a bullet, and according to ballistics increase the energy four times each time the velocity doubles. See this site: But according to relativity theory the increase in mass for an object in motion goes unnoticed until it reaches close to the speed of light. Would someone like to explain that to a gun shot victim? 4.The graphic was very interesting and I've seen similar arguments that claim to explain that two rest mass particles can be generated from one high-speed photon. This could only be true if the photons mass were mc^2 and the two rest mass particles mass were ½ mc^2. But if rest mass contains mass-energy of at least (E or mc^2) while photons energy of (E or M/c^2), mathematically rest mass energy is always higher than photons. This is because multiplying E or M x c^2 gives more energy than dividing it unless you are talking about one quantum particle where the energy = exactly c^2 as 1x1 = 1/1. This may be important *The relativistic divergence to infinity for mass, time, and length for matter does not hold if there is a smallest quantum of space as that would limit the wavelength of energy to that space as well as Lorentz contraction of matter waves. Conrad PS:still waiting to hear from Ajay Hello this is Conrad forgot to include link to ballistics site:http://www.beartoothbullets.com/rescources/calculators/php/energy.htm... Hello this is Conrad This site is from Androcles. It gives a geometrical description of v^2 and c^2 which I find very interesting. http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/E^2/EnergySquare.htm (you must cut and paste) 1.First it does substitute c^2 for v^2 in equation like mine but uses a square instead of a circle to represent the energy involved. This is understandable sense it is called v and c squared and not v or c circled (a name I sometimes call it). The circle as I use it represent path of energy as the velocity continually changes and is v^2 or c^2. 2.The Pythagorean theorem is also used a lot, "a^2 + b^2 = c^2" as it is in mine. They take E=mc^2 and extend it to "E^2 = m^2 c^4" and beyond. I use it to show that a wave that makes two rotations to complete one wave cycle, such as that of an electron, the most basic rest mass particle; can be represented by this Pythagorean theorem. For instance, if one takes a Isosceles triangle with two straight right angular lines they can represent the two rotations, (a^2+b^2) of the wave trajectory if the velocity were squared (round) and would be equal to the one slanted angular trajectory (c^2),if that velocity were squared (circled). Imagine the hypotenuse of the triangle representing a trajectory where the wave travels the same distance at the same time in both horizontal and vertical direction resulting more in a 90% arc instead of a 90% straight line and circular motion if this trajectory were to be constant. It would be the vector product of two perpendicular vectors of motion, a centrifugal and centripetal force that results in circular motion. 3.The third thing that I find extremely interesting is that you can take the velocity of a quantity of rest mass such as a bullet, and according to ballistics increase the energy four times each time the velocity doubles. See this site: But according to relativity theory the increase in mass for an object in motion goes unnoticed until it reaches close to the speed of light. Would someone like to explain that to a gun shot victim? 4.The graphic was very interesting and I've seen similar arguments that claim to explain that two rest mass particles can be generated from one high-speed photon. This could only be true if the photons mass were mc^2 and the two rest mass particles mass were ½ mc^2. But if rest mass contains mass-energy of at least (E or mc^2) while photons energy of (E or M/c^2), mathematically rest mass energy is always higher than photons. This is because multiplying E or M x c^2 gives more energy than dividing it unless you are talking about one quantum particle where the energy = exactly c^2 as 1x1 = 1/1. This may be important *The relativistic divergence to infinity for mass, time, and length for matter does not hold if there is a smallest quantum of space as that would limit the wavelength of energy to that space as well as Lorentz contraction of matter waves. Conrad PS:still waiting to hear from Ajay Newton's third law: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Androcles's third law: For every photon there is an equal and opposite rephoton. For every Ajay there is an equal and opposite remoron. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.