Re: 100 Years of E=mc2


PD wrote:
Y.Porat wrote:
Y.Porat wrote:
PD wrote:
> > > > >
and also

> > > simple does n tmake it less important !!

TIA
Y.Porat
---------------------------------


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
------------------------
evn if yiou take th ebefore and after analysis you get the same

supose a compleax process in which youhave particles in
and out energy and other particles
you can always tarsalte it all to mc^2 in both sides of in and out
paticles can be transtaled to the equivalent mc^2)
.

and you will get tha the altogether in mass is exactly as the
altogethjer out mass
using the E=mc^2
am i right ??

TIA
Y.Porat
-------------------------

Unfortunately, Porat, your last two messages were so badly mangled in
the English that I can't make enough sense of them to respond.

PD
-------------------------
it seems like a nice way to evade th e problem
actauly it might be some of my fault because it is new arguments
even for me
so let me try again:

1 ith ebase for my new claim that mass is conserved goe sl*** this

if we look at the formula E=mc^2
there ar eonly TWO physical entities ther m and c
c by itself is certainly not energy
so ??
the second term there m is waht gives the 'c' the entity orf enery
actually we can fraze it in many ways
and even you could suggest how to fraze it but theidea and logic of it
is undemyable
we can say that both m and c are THE components of energy
(i refrain from saying my old claim that energy is mass inmotion
because you will imediately and authomatically willreject it (:-)
so you cant deny that c without m is not energy
so you cant dismiss the indespensible of m in that entity that i
scalled energy

thast is in general
do you accept that general abstract insight ??
later we can get into detailes
but fierst lets examine the above abstarct principle

2
the formula E=mc^2 is valid for photons as well
because it is an ** universal ** eqaution
right ??

TIA
Y.Porat
----------------

TIA
Y.Porat
----------------------

.

Quantcast