Jump to content

isnt einstein e=emc^2 wrong shouldnt it be e=1/2*e^2?


Recommended Posts

assuming matter at microscopic level its moving at light speed you just apply the formula for kinetic energy=1/2*m*v^2

 

so why einstein get it wrong and got trhoguh like confuse the sun atmospheric refraction with gravitational lensing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither of these formulas have nothing to do with Einstein or physics.

But from math's sake, let's solve them. 

e=emc^2 =>  we can conclude that m=1/c^2

e=1/2*e^2 => we can conclude that there are two solutions, e=0 and e=2.

Hope that helps.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, raaaid said:

yeah i meant e=mc^2 should be e=0.5*mc^2

 

Yeah, I was just teasing you.

As you probably already guessed, though, Einstein did not make a mistake. Simply put, E=mc^2 tells an object's energy while it is at rest. It tells the relation, how much energy you would get from mass, if you would turn matter into energy.

Kinetic energy tells you only the kinetic part of the moving object's energy. In addition to that the object would also have it's "energy at rest" (mc^2), could have potential energy etc.

Also, this kinetic energy formula E=1/2mv^2 is actually "about right" at low speeds. The full formula has v^2/c^2 element in it, which is rounded to zero, when we are talking about speeds that are a lot less than the speed of light c.

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

what blows my mind is how twisted the bend space is and how can it be much more simple

 

you just take an shrinking frame of reference on earth that shrinks with distance to the center squared

 

with that non inertial frame of refernce the moons actually gone staright

 

i think einstein was a conspirator after all he defined relativity as the perception of time with a pretty lady, wtf

also the speed of light can be transpessed:

 

at 50 g aceleration it takes two days to reach light speed just a lot of time will have ppassed by on earth but just two days for the pilot

 

if he goes on for 4 days at 50 g what would happen?

 

anser in the only forward time machine by futurama

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

edit:

 

another you have a rotating tube with two masses exactly in the center

 

a vibration offsets slightly the masses and centrifugal force does his work , from where did this angular momentum appear if accounting for spot masses initially was zero?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Suggestion: Get a little deeper into it. Study physics, if you have the time.

And then, when you know what you are talking about, come back to your discoveries.

 

You will never be able to maintain 50g for 4 days, because your mass will approach infinity as you approach the speed of light, so you will need always more, infinitely more, energy to get any more acceleration.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, 216th_Nocke said:

You will never be able to maintain 50g for 4 days, because your mass will approach infinity as you approach the speed of light

as you say your rocket mass is huge but so is the mass of the propellent, from the astronaut perception everythings normal along those two days, or do yo think the astronaut feels any impediment to move due to his big mass? he doesnt everythings normal for him just his time from EARTHS perception is extreamly slow

Edited by raaaid
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

so the rocket cant keep acelerating cause his mass tends to infinite, so does the mass of the propellents so it keeps going, check mate einstein

 

einstein was the conspirator that after wwi instead of going to the stars we keep messing with time travel, its in asimovs end of eternity

Link to post
Share on other sites

edit:

 

what strikes me is people believing what we are told from above if from above they let people starve when it means a profit

 

i got traumatized by watching tv, i just can not watch tv no more nor tell some of what ive hear and seen if i dont want this deleted

 

serves this as an example:

 

i was watching a documental late at night on arthur c clarcke retirement in sri lanka

 

suddenly he dropped the bomb, i only have sex with puber childs in excahbge of goods he said with those twisted eyes

 

researching, this interview was made by the daily mirror and published but to the request of the interpol to the tape I WATCHED ON TV they didnt provide it and clarcke got away with it

 

of course he was being made lord of england next year

 

1984 all the way, theres no democrazy or human justice but global dicatorship of money

Edited by raaaid
Link to post
Share on other sites

i think everythings flat or just two dimensional

 

changes in the thrid dimension are just actually change of size

 

is change of size with distance illusory?

 

ir is change of size real and distance illusory

 

i think the mind blowing consequence of relativity is something wild and happens unnnoticed

 

you move a couple of meters and all reality has changed and eternity happened, you just dont notice cause your memories change with it

edit:

 

i also think if we werent eternals theres not posible chance we were here now

 

its one in an infinitium to be here now

 

26 minutes ago, RAY-EU said:

 

 

 

the thing is that my tv often goes crazy and shows me parallel worlds

 

for example ive seen the long red raincoats and green robin hood fashion designed for 2012 by tino casal who died in the 80s with ancountable bizarre stuff, i chill down on some of the stuff ive seen not belonging to this reality

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...