English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

6 answers

Depends what you mean by "produced". If you mean convert energy into mass, then yes, it is and that is how mass was created. However, it takes an incredible amount of energy to create a little mass, and that energy is gone from the universe, stored in the form of mass.

So yes, energy can be converted to mass, but the total energy-mass balance is constant (as far as is understood).

2007-12-24 06:32:02 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

E=MC^2 is not quite Undertood. IF E is the Energy of a quantity of mass ,it would then means that every particles inside the mass is moving at the veloctiy of light,
However that just does not match the Electrostatic energy scenario of the Elements of the Atoms which in themselves have been proven to move at less than the velocity of Light.
This is where Quantum Mechanics and Einstein's Relativity Theory actually clash.

Energy is the Result of the power structure of the Universe. It is a quantitized process that has been set .Hence Energy is a conserved phenomenon. Mass is related to energy in the sense that it is the power locked in to space that causes its motion. Hence when we see a mass in motion we say it has Energy. Just like if I am pooped and I dont really feel like moving the Doctor would say I have no Energy.

Mass has been structured by our Creator during the Process of construction of the Universe. It is not a reversible process by any natural means.The mass content and the energy content of the Universe as well as its time period is a Constant. Mass is a tangible substance whereas Energy is just a process.

Since Energy relates to the motion of a mass it is not an entiy. So Energy cannot become a mass structure.

2007-12-24 07:03:35 · answer #2 · answered by goring 6 · 0 0

Every high energy physics accelerator does just that. Electricity goes in, we accelerate one type of particle (e.g. electrons or protons) and when they collide, they make new particles.

It's kind of an expensive way to "make" mass, though. And in the end that energy had to come from somewhere and whatever system produced it, it had to "lose" a commensurate amount of mass. So in the end nothing got really created. We just moved mass from one place to another with a rather expensive Rube Goldberg machine.

Think about it this way: by shipping a ten ton freight container from China to the US, you have moved the equivalent of 10^4*9*10^16J or almost 10^21J.

That is A LOT of energy.

2007-12-24 07:00:39 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

This equation is a theoretical construct, that points to exactly what you are saying!

if mass can produce energy, or e = mc^2, the note that

e/c^2 = m, or mass appears if you take some energy e, and divide it by the speed of light, which itself is a limiting value.

2007-12-24 07:08:02 · answer #4 · answered by sparta_moron 3 · 1 0

Isn't this the essence of "pair production," where a couple of high energy photons can create an electron and a positron?

2007-12-24 06:33:46 · answer #5 · answered by Steve H 5 · 3 0

I will say, yes, eventually! Right now we are doing just the opposite.

2007-12-24 06:35:52 · answer #6 · answered by gzlakewood@sbcglobal.net 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers