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.
===..

 

E=mc² has everything to do with the mass an object contains, and the equivalent energy. It has nothing to do with intertia.

 

E=mc² has everything to do with the mass an object contains, and the equivalent energy.
It has nothing to do with intertia.

'
' 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. /
===.

 

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.

 

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.

Rest mass is exactly equal to E = mc^2.

===========.

 

@Socratus

The OP does not, as I see it, contain a question.

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.

 

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.

 

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.

==.
Forms of energy.
You should be able to recognise the main types of energy.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/science/aqa_pre_2011/energy/heatrev4.shtml
#
http://www.zephyrus.co.uk/energy2.html
#
etc . .
===========.

 

==.
Forms of energy.
You should be able to recognise the main types of energy.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/science/aqa_pre_2011/energy/heatrev4.shtml
#
http://www.zephyrus.co.uk/energy2.html
#
etc . .
===========.

Are you explaining something, or trying to ask a question?

 

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
===.

 

Nobody gives answer

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.

 

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.

==.
Does the inertia of a body depend upon its \(m = \frac{E}{{{c^2}}}\) ?

==.

 

==.
Does the inertia of a body depend upon its \(m = \frac{E}{{{c^2}}}\) ?

==.

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

 

Are you the same bloke from socratus.com? Who believes that the secret of god & existence is hidden in the theory of vacuum & light?

 

Does the inertia of a body depend upon its

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.

 

Rest mass is exactly equal to E = mc^2.

===========.

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.

 

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.

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

 

No! Only for objects that are standing still.
Even then a spring that is compressed has more mass
than when it is uncompressed.

==.

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