Question

how could one justify mass-energy( real-abstract) relationship...need your views...??

Answer 1

as one knows mass could be defined in kgs and one could say that here is 1 kg of let's say tomato but ENERGY can't be seen or one could say take it here's one joule of energy..rather than justifying it on basis of displacement so how they both be interrelated to each other...?????? and one could reach mass-energy equivalence as E=M\[C ^{2}\]...!!
please justify it!!

Answer 2

Mass is nothing else than condensed form of energy.. And they are inter-convertible..
For example: During fission mass gets converted to energy.. And that is how nuclear bombs and atom bomb work..
Also energy can be converted to mass. Most commonly this occurs in particle accelerators. You can take two light particles, e.g., an electron and a positron, accelerate them to high kinetic energies, and collide. The products of such an collision many include much heavier particles, like protons and neutrons.
And also: The "binding energy" of nucleons is converted to mass
when the nucleons disassemble from the nucleus.

These mass energy conversions always follow \(E=mc^2\)

And you can say \(9\times 10^{16}\) joules instead of 1 kg!

Answer 3

i was actually looking these articles at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass-energy_equivalence i found this excerpt
Albert Einstein proposed mass–energy equivalence in 1905 in one of his Annus Mirabilis papers entitled "Does the inertia of a body depend upon its energy-content?"[1] The equivalence is described by the famous equation:E=MC^2
i think..i hope.. that this excerpt is conveying inertia (object's resistance to oppose force) rather than mass so could this mean Einstein mentioned inertia and not mass in his mass-energy equivalence...??
and except for high nuclear reactions where we could see this conversion...??

Answer 4

Mass-energy equivalence doesn't talk about inertia..
Let me check that article!

Answer 5

well that's too lengthy.. And i don't prefer reading bulk!
Can you be a bit specific with your question?

Answer 6

i think that's in 1st paragraph you don't need to go beyond but i am just talking about this excerpt i am confused about
Albert Einstein proposed mass–energy equivalence in 1905 in one of his Annus Mirabilis papers entitled [[[[[["Does the inertia of a body depend upon its energy-content?"[1] The equivalence is described by the famous equation:
e=MC^2]]]]]]]]]]]..this is the last line i am confused about is inertia is being justifed in einstein's work...???????

Answer 7

Inertia depends upon mass which is inter-convertible with energy! But if you ask the question "Does inertia depend upon speed?" the answer would be 'no'
And i don't mention KE and use speed instead because KE includes mass too.. And inertia depends on mass.
Higher mass-->more inertia

Answer 8

might be inertia could fit it as inertia is object's resistance ..right!! so if there is force on object say in northwards and its covering displacement(let's say distance here as moving in one dimension along st line northwards) then if one tend to provide some acc to body in north side then body won't be really seems to be opposing one could see that as one swings it requires a certain force to be in swing but once you are in you tend to apply comparatively lesser force ..continuing to topic if we tend to apply acc to body southwards then first we need to have force greater than northwards force..??
ok what i am really saying is that the inertia of body ..isn't it different in different direction as one requires greater force to move with particular acc to southwards as comared to northwards ...????????
so can't we say that inertia do depends on energy rather than saying mass-energy are interconvertible...!!
and there's no such example that could give proof for this mass-energy equivalence rather than nuclear reactions!!!!

Answer 9

@ujjwal can u please explain the concept of KE including mass..?? may be that could simplify!!

Answer 10

\[KE=\frac{1}{2}mv^2\]So, you have KE is directly proportional to mass. That's it!

Answer 11

i think we could have discussion on topic whether inertia could be different in different direction and then is energy doing some sort of contribution in it!!

Answer 12

ok..that's just indicating the proportionality not conversion what do u think!!

Answer 13

Inertia is not different in different directions!
Inertia is the property of a body by virtue of which it doesn't tend to change its state of rest or motion.

When you make an object in motion come to rest, inertia will act!
You can't talk about inertia when you are increasing the speed of a body (when you push a body travelling towards north by applying force towards north, you are not stopping it).

Answer 14

so inertia is only active in two cases only
1) when object coming from rest to motion
2)when object comes to rest
and not when acclerating...??

Answer 15

exactly!

Answer 16

sorry could not resist asking http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertia actually read it and found really contradictory thing : nertia is the resistance of any physical object to a change in its state of motion or rest, or [[[[[[[[[[[the tendency of an object to resist any change in its motion]]]]]]]here the change in its motion is referring to acceleration ....!! and when the object is moving from rest to some speed then it also accelerating...so how can't we say that inertia is not active during acceleration!!
sorry if i am getting rude i just need to clear out few things!! thanks a lot for your help..:)

Answer 17

If it talks about the object moving from rest to certain velocity, it is talking about change in state from rest to motion.
And yeah inertia acts when you 'tend' to change the state.. The body in motion needn't necessarily come to a state of total rest. But then you should be tending to do so!

Answer 18

sorry can't get it what do u want to say..??????????
i just wanna know that do u agree with "You can't talk about inertia when you are increasing the speed of a body (when you push a body travelling towards north by applying force towards north, you are not stopping it"...or agree with this ...."And yeah inertia acts when you 'tend' to change the state"...!!

Answer 19

tending to change the state= 'trying' to make the body in motion come to rest and the body in rest to motion!
So, i agree with both and they are both same!

Answer 20

amm..actually quite contradictory one is saying
1) you can't think of inertia when accelerating the body
2)yes u can
but the truth is that one when one object tends to change its state of motion it is in fact accelerating!! but your first point ""You can't talk about inertia when you are increasing the speed of a body(that's what the acceleration " opposes it!!

Answer 21

Ok i guess i was slightly wrong.. yeah, inertia comes into play when you tend to change the state of motion any which way!
But then inertia is independent upon direction.
Suppose you push a body moving northward towards north, you accelerate it and apply a certain amount of force (say F)
Again when you apply the same force F towards south, you will decelerate it by same amount.
If you apply the same force towards East, the eastward acceleration will again be of same magnitude.
So, inertia is independent of direction!

And thank you! I just got to know where i was wrong!

Answer 22

what i am actually trying to say is that when body is moving in a particular direction then its easy to produce certain acceleration as it has already overcome the frictional limting barrier but when we to move it other direction it require considerably larger force...!!

Answer 23

as first we need to stop it then again move it that makes body again in the effect of frictional forces..!!

Answer 24

Don't involve friction in it!
In physics we study one thing by isolating all others.. And in space there is no friction but there is inertia!
And though it might be a bit non-intuitive, to produce an acceleration 'a' in any direction you need a force F given by F=ma

And when a body travelling northwards decelerates, it necessarily doesn't start moving southward instantly. you have to apply the force for a considerable amount of time and then it will switch direction. But meanwhile, the body will have a southward acceleration even if it will be travelling towards north!

Answer 25

hey i found some of the Einstein work on " do inertia depends on energy of body..."..!! http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/ i think i should read it before continuing further so that i could have more evidences...:P..!!
anyways thanks a lot!!

Answer 26

You are Welcome!

Answer 27

Honorable discussers!

None of you cared to include the change in mass with velocity. This change becomes infinite at v close to c.
A lot of "number-of-angels-on-the -needle-counting" has been thrown into the unsuspecting screens of the viewers.
This slightly rough intrusion by me is caused by the worry for preservation of clarity and knowledge IN THE NAIVE UNINFORMED READERS THAT MIGHT OCCUR INTO ALL THIS FOG !!! You have not spoken clarity, you did speak alot o circular and useless statements.

Answer 28

@mikael but in reality i am not discussing here the objects moving at speed of light ...that would make me interested in including special theory of relativity but if u have your points u can put it regarding the question..!! and could start a new discussion
and yes its not my work "does inertia of a body depend on energy of body"..!! its einstein's work and if have a doubt go check it here http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/
that made me interested if that is really so or not..?? but thank you for u suggestion i would look at relativity section also!!
and if u think that considering the fact that change in mass with velocity could relate mass and energy and could enlighten the mass-energy equivalence..and could clarify things..then go ahead..would love to hear from you..!!

Answer 29

@UnkleRhaukus @experimentX @eyust707 @ganeshie8 ......could you please help me on this discussion!!! on " how inertia could be measure of en energy of the body"...?? and further how could we establish equivalence between mass and energy....??