Difference between revisions of "Attempts to prove E=mc²"
(→Motivation for E=mc²: Another motivation of E=mc² is to try to make the Theory of Relativity consistent with the principle of the conservative energy.) |
|||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
The insistence on E=mc² is partly motivated by a quest for a "grand unified theory," which has never been found despite the waste of billions of dollars and roughly a century looking for it. If mass and energy were equivalent as E=mc² asserts, then there should be a theory that unifies gravitation and electromagnetic forces. There isn't, and the [[Bible]] correctly predicts that there isn't. | The insistence on E=mc² is partly motivated by a quest for a "grand unified theory," which has never been found despite the waste of billions of dollars and roughly a century looking for it. If mass and energy were equivalent as E=mc² asserts, then there should be a theory that unifies gravitation and electromagnetic forces. There isn't, and the [[Bible]] correctly predicts that there isn't. | ||
| − | Another motivation of E=mc² is to try to make the [[Theory of Relativity]] consistent with the principle of the | + | Another motivation of E=mc² is to try to make the [[Theory of Relativity]] consistent with the principle of the conservation of energy. |
[[category:Relativity]] | [[category:Relativity]] | ||
Revision as of 03:46, August 5, 2015
See also E=mc².
Attempts to prove E=mc² are futile because there is no mass-energy equivalence. But that has not stopped people, including liberals who avoid the Bible, from insisting that they have cleverly developed a "proof" of E=mc², and thereby established a mass-energy equivalence which, in fact, does not exist.
Many of these "proofs" are either circular in logic, or assume unproven (and often implausible) premises. A common defect to these "proofs" is an unjustified assumption that the energy and momentum of a physical system have a dependence on velocity akin to a moving participle.
Many of these "proofs" use contrived thought experiments to try to bootstrap the kinetic energy of a moving particle into an assertion about the energy of a resting mass. Aside from changes in potential energy, there is no direct connection between the kinetic energy of a moving mass and its rest energy.
Example of circularity in "proofs"
The argument in some "proofs" is that although overall energy, kinetic plus potential, is conserved, the potential energy can manifest itself as an increase in the resting mass -- an assumption that implicitly redefines mass to comport with the conclusion sought.
False experimental claims
It is common for atheists to claim that E=mc² is proven by what are, in fact, ordinary chemical reactions that emit energy. Nuclear-fission reactions, such as the transformation of hydrogen to helium, do not demonstrate any connection between the rest energy of a mass and the speed of light, as E=mc² asserts.
Broken clocks are correct twice a day, and some isolated experiments have asserted verification of E=mc² in certain carefully framed scenarios. But no experiment has demonstrated E=mc² with any reasonable degree of generality.
Motivation for E=mc²
The insistence on E=mc² is partly motivated by a quest for a "grand unified theory," which has never been found despite the waste of billions of dollars and roughly a century looking for it. If mass and energy were equivalent as E=mc² asserts, then there should be a theory that unifies gravitation and electromagnetic forces. There isn't, and the Bible correctly predicts that there isn't.
Another motivation of E=mc² is to try to make the Theory of Relativity consistent with the principle of the conservation of energy.