C squared

[MJA]

Thanks John,
We agree.
I know of only one absolute certainty in the universe, and that is it's balance of equality.
Equal is more truthful than I.

=
MJA

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Hi John, good to hear from you, but in my book, time is no more than the easy measurement of "matter in motion." It's all "based" on earth/moon/solar system/galaxy motions...

Lloyd

Hello Lloyd responding to #4
All the forms of energy function within at least 4 dimentions. Nothing moves in space without time.
John.

[michellemfry]

We had the measured c, and then we also had mathematical skills.
Using some of those skillls, a relationship was found to be true and from it we could say that energy and mass were equal when we looked at what was c and squared it, and how that equation cleared up many mathematical problems of that era.
We were able to find out and explain how a small amount of mass gave us a huge amount of energy when released. The trouble was finding the small mass since atoms were mostly empty space. Dr. Einstein at first thought it unable to be hit or located. It was very unlikely at that time.
Later, the problem would be solved with a chain reaction set off by one particle able to make the sudden multiple appearance of fissioned pieces.
It was the chain reaction that was the discovery there.
Haven't you ever felt something that was going on and you couldn't help yourself, because the reaction was causing the split effect of great energy and small mass, that would be seen in the exact square of the speed of light.
The energy and mass equating was big enough to square the measured speed of light.

[neutralino]

Why is this in the Quantum Physics forum? E=mc^2 is a formula derived from special relativity, which has nothing to do with quantum theory.

Note to moderator: It would make more sense for this post to be moved to either the Classical, or General Physics forums.

[michellemfry]

Ok, Dr. Einstein, someone wants the c squared moved to another section of the discussion sections. Go ahead, and I'll just clean up the usual disasterous future events that fallout. No, we love to serve the equation.
Better yet, blast the little one and let's see where she ends up. Any little games to be cleared up, go ahead. Come on, sweetie, just squeeze the little thing until her head pops in and out and she forgets what she wanted you to do first.

[neutralino]

Ok, Dr. Einstein, someone wants the c squared moved to another section of the discussion sections. Go ahead, and I'll just clean up the usual disasterous future events that fallout. No, we love to serve the equation.
Better yet, blast the little one and let's see where she ends up. Any little games to be cleared up, go ahead. Come on, sweetie, just squeeze the little thing until her head pops in and out and she forgets what she wanted you to do first.

For the record, if this was a reply to my thread, I have no idea what it means.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Why is this in the Quantum Physics forum? E=mc^2 is a formula derived from special relativity, which has nothing to do with quantum theory.

Note to moderator: It would make more sense for this post to be moved to either the Classical, or General Physics forums.

What about quantum cosmology, Neutralino...? I think E=MC^2 applies there, considerably, does it not...? Also, remember Einstein, himself, received his Nobel Prize for his quantum ideas, first. But, it's your post, you can do with it what you want, within civil reason.

Lloyd

[neutralino]

What about quantum cosmology, Neutralino...? I think E=MC^2 applies there, considerably, does it not...? Also, remember Einstein, himself, received his Nobel Prize for his quantum ideas, first. But, it's your post, you can do with it what you want, within civil reason.

Lloyd

Quantum cosmology is a subset of cosmology, not quantum physics, since it generally includes gravity. In fact, the arxiv classification groups general relativity and quantum cosmology together. However, this thread is not discussing quantum cosmology, it is merely discussing a formula from special relativity; a purely classical theory.

And yes, I know that Einstein obtained his Nobel prize for the photoelectric effect (some people say that this was because no-one knew enough about relativity at the time to review his papers for a nomination for the nobel prize, so he was nominated for another of his useful works, which was comprehensible!).

Anyway, I was only trying to help. If you don't want to move the thread, then fine. Geez..

[michellemfry]

Hey Neutralino,
I was in a mood when I went through the list of things that the TOE needed and I start thinking about a time when people were so dehumanized that any cessation of wonder was met with, Oh thank you! Listen up, get your eyes and your brain on the uiverse and don't let go. The world has found every way to inflict pain on one little grief stricken place in the cosmos. That place is safe and has any little thing it wants. Love you too that way if you would just give up hate forever.

[AntonioLao]

The scalar product of absolute acceleration (a) and the space-time metric (r) is the square of lightspeed (c): a∙r=c. However, since absolute acceleration is not detectable, c seems to lack physical meaning.