Going back to the Einstein’s question.

Discussion in 'Physics' started by socratus, Apr 8, 2012.

  1. socratus

    Thread Starter Member

    Mar 26, 2012
    267
    3
    Going back to the Einstein’s question.
    #
    In his Miracle 1905 Einstein wrote the Fourth paper:
    “ On the Electrodynamics of moving Bodies.” ( SRT).
    And as a postscript to his forth, the Fifth paper:
    “ Does the inertia of a body depend upon its energy content?”
    As he realized the answer was:
    “ Yes, the inertia ( ! ) depends on its energy E= Mc^2.” ( ! )
    Not Galileo and not Newton explained the cause of inertia.
    It was Einstein who explained the reason of inertia:
    He said that the inertia depends on its energy E= Mc^2.
    It means what SRT must be connected with E= Mc^2 .
    It means what must be connection between Lorentz’s
    transformation and E= Mc^2.
    #.
    The same Einstein’s question in a little detail interpretation:
    “Does the inertia of a body ( for example: of a light quanta
    or of an electron) depend upon its energy content E=Mc^2 ?”
    Thinking logically, the answer must be : Yes, it depends.”
    When new question arise: ” How is possible to understand the
    connection between E=Mc^2 and E=ht or E= kb or E= h*w. ?”
    On my opinion " The Law of Conservation and Transformation
    of Energy/ Mass" (according to one single light quanta /electron )
    gives answer to this question..
    The problem is that now nobody wants to ask yourself that
    „The Law of Conservation and Transformation of Energy/ Mass"
    means according to one single light quanta / photon /electron.
    ============== . .
    Best wishes.
    Israel Sadovnik. Socratus.
    ===..
     
  2. Wendy

    Moderator

    Mar 24, 2008
    20,766
    2,536
    E=mc² has everything to do with the mass an object contains, and the equivalent energy. It has nothing to do with intertia.
     
  3. socratus

    Thread Starter Member

    Mar 26, 2012
    267
    3
    '
    ' Does the inertia of a body depend upon its energy content? '
    / Einstein. 27.09.1905. /
    What is the formula of this energy content?
    The formula is : E=Mc^2
    Does the inertia of a body depend upon its E=Mc^2 ?
    / 09.04.2012. /
    ===.

     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2012
  4. russ_hensel

    Well-Known Member

    Jan 11, 2009
    818
    47
    The OP does not, as I see it, contain a question. In any case mass is both a measure of inertia and as a source of gravitation. The best measure of both mass and energy seems to be recognizing that E = mc^2 is not a formula for conversion, but is a physical identity, mass and energy is the same thing. Rest mass is a slightly different matter.
     
  5. socratus

    Thread Starter Member

    Mar 26, 2012
    267
    3
    Rest mass is exactly equal to E = mc^2.

    ===========.
     
  6. studiot

    AAC Fanatic!

    Nov 9, 2007
    5,005
    513
    @Socratus

    I'm sure people here are happy to discuss questions or points that a thread originator wishes to make.

    You have now been called by another member in both threads you have started for doing neither.

    We consider spurious posting trolling as it wastes others' time and view it very seriously as do other similar forums.

    Please make a point for discussion or ask a question.
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2012
  7. DerStrom8

    Well-Known Member

    Feb 20, 2011
    2,428
    1,328
    Energy equals Mass times Speed of light squared. That is what E=MC^2 means.

    Kinetic energy has an effect on inertia. You really need to think about what type of energy you're thinking about.
     
  8. socratus

    Thread Starter Member

    Mar 26, 2012
    267
    3
  9. DerStrom8

    Well-Known Member

    Feb 20, 2011
    2,428
    1,328
  10. socratus

    Thread Starter Member

    Mar 26, 2012
    267
    3
    Where does strange E= Mc^2 come from?
    1
    In 1905 Einstein asked:
    “ Does the inertia of a body depend upon its energy content?”
    As he realized the answer was:
    “ Yes, it depends on its energy content E= Mc^2 ”
    It means that E= Mc^2 has some connection with inertia but
    nobody explains this interaction.
    2.
    In 1928 Dirac said that E= Mc^2 comes from vacuum
    and can be as positive as negative too.
    3 -
    Sometimes E= Mc^2 can be ‘rest’ and sometimes
    can be ‘active’ and can destroy cities like
    Hiroshima and Nagasaki
    Why E= Mc^2 is so strange ?
    Nobody gives answer
    ===.
     
  11. studiot

    AAC Fanatic!

    Nov 9, 2007
    5,005
    513
    I will try one more time, since it is still not clear whether you are asking a question or what question you are asking.

    Firstly Einsteins original 1905 paper does not contain the formula

    E = m{c^2}


    It does contain the formula

    m = \frac{E}{{{c^2}}}

    Which appears similar but is more than just a superficial rearrangement, since the property we call mass is a measure of the property we call inertia.

    You will find an excellent introductory discussion of this and what I take to be your question in chapter 3 and appendix A of Frank Wilczek's book that I referred to in your previous thread.

    I really do recommend it as I think it will help you.
     
    DerStrom8 likes this.
  12. socratus

    Thread Starter Member

    Mar 26, 2012
    267
    3
    ==.
    Does the inertia of a body depend upon its m = \frac{E}{{{c^2}}} ?

    ==.
     
  13. DerStrom8

    Well-Known Member

    Feb 20, 2011
    2,428
    1,328
    Yes, of course. That's exactly what Einstein said--a body's inertia depends on its mass (m = \frac{E}{{{c^2}}}). You already answered that question when you quoted him :p
     
  14. ross

    Member

    Jul 30, 2010
    46
    0
    Are you the same bloke from socratus.com? Who believes that the secret of god & existence is hidden in the theory of vacuum & light?
     
  15. studiot

    AAC Fanatic!

    Nov 9, 2007
    5,005
    513
    Well it depends upon what you mean by inertia. Definitions have changed over the last hundred years and these days seem to produce some vehement arguments.

    In discussions like this it is always best to agree term definitions terms at the outset.

    No one has yet produced a better template for logical discussion than Euclid did with his 'Elements'.

    We often talk of reducing geometry to the 5 'axioms' of Euclid. In fact he stated in all

    23 Definitions

    5 Postulates or Axioms

    5 Common Notions

    All of which we have to understand and take with some measure of trust.



    @Ross

    Good find.
     
  16. russ_hensel

    Well-Known Member

    Jan 11, 2009
    818
    47

    No! Only for objects that are standing still. Even then a spring that is compressed has more mass than when it is uncompressed. E = mc^2 is an identity, where E is all the energy of the object.
     
  17. socratus

    Thread Starter Member

    Mar 26, 2012
    267
    3
    What do you mean by inertia ?
    What Does Inertia Mean?
    Answer:
    The term inertia as a noun is most commonly used in the field of Physics.
    The notion of inertia is by and large defined by means of Sir Isaac Newton's
    First Law of Motion.
    It states that
    'Every body perseveres in its state of being at rest or of moving
    uniformly straight ahead, except insofar as it is compelled to change
    its state by forces impressed.'
    http://www.blurtit.com/q734444.html
    #
    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_does_'inertia'_mean
    #
    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_do_you_mean_by_inertia_is_often_one_of_the_major_barriers
     
  18. socratus

    Thread Starter Member

    Mar 26, 2012
    267
    3
    ==.

    Maybe you correct.
    Many In spring grow fat.
    ==.
     
Loading...