no Emc^2 is not true
e=mc^2 is true however
2006-11-04 14:29:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah
Ok, now that I'm done laughing my *** off... E = mc^2 is correct. It's actually a relatively (no pun intended) simple idea: all matter can be turned into energy, and vice-versa.
Proof is in the fact that when an atom of uranium is split in a fission reaction, two neutrons, and two smaller atoms are the products, along with heat. The neutrons and smaller atoms add up to a mass which is less than the original uranium atom. Where did the mass go? Look no further than the heat produced: energy can be neither created, nor destroyed.
Therefore, in this case, matter has turned into energy, which is exactly what E = mc^2 predicts.
2006-11-04 14:40:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by Canadian Scientist 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Is it true? It is true in theory and practice has also shown it to be real as well. How is this formula derived is a better way to pose this question. It's not like they made it out of the blue. The theory of energy and matter comes from the fact that there is a wave-particle duality of matter. All matter displays the characteristics of both particle and wave. A French scientist named Louis de Broglie first proposed this hypothesis and along with this calculated what the theoretical wavelength of a given particle would be. He proposed that the wavelength of a particle is inversely proportional to the particles momentum. The constant of proportionality was found to be Planck’s constant. Maxwell Plank had originally proposed that energy of a wave is proportional to its frequency. Using these equations, one can correlate energy to mass of a given particle through the given particle’s theoretical wavelength.
λ=h/p=h/mv
λf=v
E=hf
E=hv/λ
E=hv/(h/mv)
E=mv^2
Erev=mc^2 (relativistic energy is equal to mass time the speed of light square since the speed of light is constant to all reference points.)
2006-11-04 15:07:06
·
answer #3
·
answered by venomfx 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
E=mc²
this implies that e is propational to mass.Mass can be converted to energy and energy can be converted to mass .This is true in case of cosmic rays in which a photon with energy and zero mass is converted to positron with mass and vice versa.
Hence it is an accurate relation
2006-11-04 15:30:50
·
answer #4
·
answered by sudhan 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hi George, Now bear in mind I've been out of school longer than
I would like to remember but I believe, and you can correct me,
that the equation is actually laid out E=mc2. Developed by
Albert Einstein it represents the law of relativity. Good luck
and thanks for the honor of participating. Good night to you,
sir.
The Avenger
2006-11-04 14:48:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by Bill R 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hi. So far every experiment has demonstrated that E=mc^2 to the limits of our ability to measure.
2006-11-04 14:30:18
·
answer #6
·
answered by Cirric 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
No! The formula is E = m x c x c
Where E = Energy, m = mass and c = speed of light.
2006-11-04 15:57:08
·
answer #7
·
answered by Norrie 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Try asking someone who survived the A-bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
2006-11-04 15:18:09
·
answer #8
·
answered by Chug-a-Lug 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
have you seen a nuclear explosion. the answer is yes
think about this at thanxgiving dinner, theres enough energy in all the atoms of the turkey to vaporize half the middle-east. if only i could get a turkey bomb to work. ;-)
2006-11-04 14:31:32
·
answer #9
·
answered by darkpheonix262 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
no actually e=mc^2
you forgot the =
2006-11-04 15:50:38
·
answer #10
·
answered by fae 6
·
0⤊
0⤋