I've been wondering what equivalence means here. Does it mean mass and energy are equal? Does it mean mass and energy are the same?
I have just started learning about how stars are powered and have been introduced to E=mc^2. From what I understand you have 2 protons with a certain mass that collide to create helium, this created nucleus weighs less, than the sum of the mass of the contributing atoms, which is given off as energy.
Where has the mass come from? Has it come from the atoms themselves?
I was reading around trying to figure it out and I read somewhere that the binding force is negative in a nucleus, which is why the mass is lower, but my understanding is that energy adds to the mass of an object and if a force is required to overcome the electromagnetic force shouldn’t that energy be positive?
Can anyone point me in the direction of where my thinking is wrong.
I understand that I don't have to panic that a 5 gram piece of A4 apparently has the mass-energy equivalence of approx 450TJ (1g == ~90TJ), there is no efficient conversion into such equivalent energy.
But that still sounds baffling. Did I misunderstand E=MC^2, or does a piece of paper technically have that much devastating potential if it were possible to convert the mass to energy with 100% efficiency?
I learned about this when looking into physical limits of computation where the cost of simple operations with hardware almost a decade ago iirc was put into perspective as 114-bits of entropy to iterate through would be enough energy to boil all of the world's oceans.
The white paper (Lenstra) also mentioned e=mc^2 and some sheets of paper which got me curious. I just want to confirm if I understood/calculated correctly.
How can humanity avoid this information catastrophe?
Does time travel violate the mass-energy equivalence principle by adding additional mass at a point in time in the universe? I mean like, if I meet my former self, there'd be two selfs each with 175 pounds of weight or 80 kilos of mass, whereas before there was only one.
is wishing for super powers like this okay?
Example: daily life generates waste, despite my best efforts. what if I could convert this waste to whatever new things I might need? (clothes, food, complex machines/tools, anything really)
Twice in the series we see examples of using magic to convert matter into energy. In Glaedr’s tale of the battle of Vroengard and in the final showdown with Galbatorix we see examples of this. Brom explicitly warns Eragon to never try to unmake something.
But he underestimated the true power of E=MC^2.
Nukes are a poor example. The fission process is actually incredibly inefficient and only a small percentage of the bomb’s mass is converted into energy.
Galbatorix’s “be not” spell would presumably convert all of his mass into energy. That’s a problem.
Let’s start with Hiroshima as a baseline. A blast of that caliber would destroy the palace and most or all of Uru-Baen.
It was 15 kilotons of TNT equivalent or about 63 terrajoules. 6.3x10^13 J.
Now let’s plug a reasonable estimate of Galbatorix’s mass into E=MC^2. There are any number of calculators on the interwebs for this. Assuming a mass of 75 kilograms for Galby we get a mass energy of 6.7x10^18 J.
This is a hundred thousand times more powerful than the Hiroshima nuke. This is more than thirty times the yield of the most powerful nuke in history, the Tsar Bomba.
There would be no Uru-baen or Vroengard left.
But of course this is fantasy and we can always wave our hands and say that it’s a different process or that in both instances the suicidal spell caster only intended to use a very tiny fraction of their mass. I’m just doing the math for the fun of it.
My thinking is that:
E = mc2
m = E / c2
as m increases, c2 decreases
So near massive (high m) objects (like the Earth) time passes slower than near less massive (low m) objects (like a satellite)
I feel like this is not completely accurate, since the speed of light is constant.
Also, how does mass change without violating the law of conservation of mass/energy
Photons are particles without mass. But whenever a system emits one, it loses a small fraction of its energy, and therefore its mass. However, the photon lacks mass and only transports energy, so conservation of energy is given, while conservation of mass is violated. If the photon is added to another system, the other system gains (although very little) mass. So is a photon transporting mass without actually having any? I'm really confused right now, and might be I just miss something simple here.
Thanks in advance for any answers!
EDIT: Thank you all for taking the time to write these answers down. They did indeed clarify a lot, concerning my question and giving a lot of further, interesting information!
https://arganesh3.wordpress.com/2013/07/21/vastureva-vaastu-emc2/
Please explain, someone.
My professor introduced the following equation:
E^2 - p^2c^2 = m^2c^4
Then he told us that we could replace c with 1 and other times with h_bar. What's the reasoning behind that?
In relativity, one can set c = G = 1, yielding 1 s = 3.00e8 m; and 1m = 1.35e27 kg. In these units, energy can be expressed as a length: 1 J = 1 kg m^2 / s^2 = 2.74e-53 s.
In quantum mechanics however, h-bar is often set to one, yielding 1 J = 1.51e33 s^-1.
How can energy at the same time be equivalent to time and frequency?
You have a device that can transfer energy into an object from every direction simultaneously. The object is stationary because of the equal forces acting on it from every side. As the object gains energy, it gains mass, then you stop the flow of energy...the object explodes, right? Would you even need to stop the flow?
For context: I'm writing a fantasy novel for NaNoWriMo. Hit me with the big words; I'm working on a Master's in linguistics and I read six languages. It's just...science is not my wheelhouse.
MP01.01 Proposal 1 - To freely adjust its speed, a subject must possess no physical mass, thus circumventing all outside factors. This makes all perception within spacetime left entirely to the discretion of the subject and the energy they exert.
.mark the timE .it's not how you think. Those sci fi novels sound so clever. And you sound clever. You build off the ideas of others like a good scientist and at some point you forget - It's all fiction.
But, it's so treacherously different. God, you sounded so fucking clever.
Tense confusion. Wait. Understand the message you have been trying to send.
Present perfect continuous mark the time.
MP15.90 Proposal 2 - The Laws of Thermodynamics apply in all circumstances. When energy passes into or out of a system, that system’s internal energy changes accordingly while maintaining an approach toward a constant state.
Paradoxes had been enticing
past perfect continuous
What happens when something couldn't have happened?
Some say the newest version is the only one that applies, implying multiple timelines but disregarding the principles of thermodynamics. Some say there's only one timeline. This is the one where that person you saw earlier was your future self, making sure everything works out.
Then there's divergence theory: An option for future convergence - or dead ends. This would've sounded right to you. Future perfect
Like a river, able to split momentarily by an island, divert entirely or spill ultimately into a still lake.
There are three of us now. So that's how it goes, then. I didn't even realize. Ah. 09:33PM Mark the time**.yle**
MP23:90.emit Proposal 3 - While manipulating the rate of forward advancement necessitates adjusting the outward effects of time, inverting the rate would necessitate removing those effects entir
They never talk about the dead ends. Really put themselves in the shoes of those left there, follow them to their logical conclusion. But you, so clever... You will.
What do you do when you pull into a dead end? Turn the car around, of course.
It's easy once you've already figured out how. present perfect.
But there's no metaphors for what happened. What is happening. Matter can't ignore the laws of physics. There can't be something where there was nothing before. So what goes back goes in the same vessel. There's no doppelganger cleaning up your mess.
It's you, here, now. It will be you, here, then.
Your futur
