As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options
E != mc^2 (Static vs. Expanding Universe)
Mad_Morlock
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
I started the original E=mc^3 thread mostly as a joke.
However, someone asked me to read up on the dimensional analysis formula used to derive E=mc^2 and I found a problem.
Einstein uses a rest mass (also known as relativistic mass or invariant mass) calculation in his formulas, assuming zero momentum in a mass at a rest state. He did this because he assumed the Universe was static, and it wasn't until 1929 when Hubble found out that galaxies were actually receding from each other that Einstein realized his mistake.
In an expanding universe F*p != 0 because the momentum of the expanding universe is non-zero, so he would not have been able to remove this from his equation to derive E=mc^2.
Therefore E > mc^2 as the momentum of an expanding universe has not yet been figured into the equation.
Again, feel free to say rant and rave and say terrible things. I'm all for Freedom of Speech.
However, someone asked me to read up on the dimensional analysis formula used to derive E=mc^2 and I found a problem.
Einstein uses a rest mass (also known as relativistic mass or invariant mass) calculation in his formulas, assuming zero momentum in a mass at a rest state. He did this because he assumed the Universe was static, and it wasn't until 1929 when Hubble found out that galaxies were actually receding from each other that Einstein realized his mistake.
In an expanding universe F*p != 0 because the momentum of the expanding universe is non-zero, so he would not have been able to remove this from his equation to derive E=mc^2.
Therefore E > mc^2 as the momentum of an expanding universe has not yet been figured into the equation.
Again, feel free to say rant and rave and say terrible things. I'm all for Freedom of Speech.
Mad_Morlock on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
I did, actually.
And I found a problem.
He assumed a zero momentum for a particle in it's rest frame when calculating E = mc^2, which is false if the Universe is expanding.
I used to be like you, I was all for freedom of speech. Until I started reading what some people ( like you! )were writing on forum like this one.
Do you have any idea what rest frame actually means? Well, no, you dont, this much is pretty damn obvious.
- John Stuart Mill
after this post
You'd have to calculate the momentum vector in relation to the point of origin of the Big Bang. Einstein assumed the the Universe was completely static, not expanding, and made no allowances for the momentum of the expansionary forces of the Big Bang.
The concept of the Big Bang wasn't even there when Einstein derived the formulas for relativity. He assumed a static universe.
Therefore E != mc^2 as no allowances have been made for the conservation of universal momentum.
You don't need to make cosmological mesurements in order to assert a rest frame. One of the bigger points of relativity, in case you missed it, is that there is no absolute rest frame.
The cosmology you're talking about has nothing to do with the underpinnings of relativity.
Good to hear.