Re: 100 Years of E=mc2
- From: "PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 6 Sep 2006 07:49:39 -0700
Y.Porat wrote:
PD wrote:
Y.Porat wrote:-------------------
PD wrote:
Y.Porat wrote:----------------
-------------------------------------
Good one :-)
But there is a Law of Conservation of Stupidity.
Just watch him.
Glad to see you're back, by the way.
Dirk Vdm
to all the imbecil parrots
there is no law of conservation of this chemical element of the other
but there is a law of conseravtion of MASS
No, actually, there's not.
you ignored the rest of that post
in mc^2 =E
there are ONLY TWO PHYSICSL ENTITIES
one is m the other is c^2
if m is meaningless you have that th e most meaninful element in
mc^2
is the c^2 ??
so what is the roll; m there if it is nonexistat than you can
write
E=c^2 and thats all why bother etering there the negligable m ??
or something that you catuallt dont know what is its meaning ??
I didn't say it didn't have any meaning. I said there is no such law as
conservation of mass.
If I take a look at low-speed KE = (1/2)mv^2, the v has a specific
meaning, but there is no conservation of velocity.
If I take a look at Newton's 2nd law F=ma, the a has a specific
meaning, but there is no conservation of acceleration.
Do not overassume what you cannot assume.
PD
wow waht a quick answer
as if in live conversation
now
if m i s always in energy it means it is always there !!!
c is consatnt
E is conserved so ..---------...
m is conserved as well
dont you see that ??
That's not what the equation says. E=mc^2 does NOT say:
"Where there is energy, there is also mass. And where there is mass
there is also energy."
This has been pointed out to before.
It is a relationship between *before* and *after* states.
If you have mass *before*, then this can be converted to energy
*after*. This does NOT mean that there is also energy before and also
mass after. It means that one gets *changed* into the other.
If you have energy *before*, then this can be converted to mass
*after*. This does NOT mean that there is also mass before and also
energy after. It means that one gets *changed* into the other.
And no, this does NOT mean that if E is conserved, then m is conserved
as well.
Why? Because E=mc^2 does not represent the *total* energy of a system.
Recall that there are many contributions to energy (electrostatic
potential, linear kinetic, stochastic kinetic, rotational kinetic,
etc...) and it is only the *sum* of all contributions to the energy
that is conserved. An individual contribution (such as conversion from
rest mass) is NOT individually conserved, any more than electrostatic
potential energy is individually conserved.
Fundamental misunderstandings of the conservation laws, Porat.
PD
if m was not conserved E would not be conserved as well !!
because it is not enough that c alone will be conserved
(sorry if it was a quick answer as well
do i make sense ??
TIA
Y.Porat
------------------------
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: 100 Years of E=mc2
- From: Y.Porat
- Re: 100 Years of E=mc2
- References:
- 100 Years of E=mc2
- From: physics . einstein
- Re: 100 Years of E=mc2
- From: PD
- Re: 100 Years of E=mc2
- From: Dirk Van de moortel
- Re: 100 Years of E=mc2
- From: Y.Porat
- Re: 100 Years of E=mc2
- From: PD
- Re: 100 Years of E=mc2
- From: Y.Porat
- Re: 100 Years of E=mc2
- From: PD
- Re: 100 Years of E=mc2
- From: Y.Porat
- 100 Years of E=mc2
- Prev by Date: Re: 100 Years of E=mc2
- Next by Date: Re: 100 Years of E=mc2
- Previous by thread: Re: 100 Years of E=mc2
- Next by thread: Re: 100 Years of E=mc2
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
