E=mc^2: The Most Famous Equation in History... and its Folklore

Relativity free of Folklore #1

by Felix Alba-Juez, Manuel Toharia-Cortés (Foreword), Jesus Zamora Bonilla (Foreword)

This e-book corresponds to the first chapter of the printed book entitled "Galloping with Light - Einstein, Relativity, and Folklore", and is the first of the e-Series entitled "Relativity free of Folklore".

Because you deserve more than just folklore, in this e-book you will find the answers to the following intriguing questions:

1) Is it really possible to transform matter into energy?

2) Why do renowned physicists say it is possible and that the famous equation E=mc^2 proves it, when, in fact, that is not true?

3) Why do they say that the mass of a material object is simply its quantity of matter when, in reality, that is not true?

4) Why do they associate the equation E=mc^2 only with nuclear energy and in particular with the atomic bomb when, actually, that equation had historically nothing to do with it?

The fact that the reader may not have a scientific education does not mean that s/he does not have the intelligence to understand profound concepts -- as long as they are presented with semantic and epistemological clarity. After all, Einstein said that Science is simply the refinement of our intuition and everyday experiences.

Genres: Science, Physics

71 pages, Kindle Edition

First published April 29, 2011

About the author

Felix was born in Burgos (Spain) in 1948. In 1949, his parents settled in Necochea (Argentina) where he completed his elementary and high school education. In 1966 he moved to Bahía Blanca (Argentina) where he graduated in Electrical Engineering at the 'Universidad Nacional del Sur' (UNS). In 1971, he started his academic life as Teaching Assistant of Mathematics at the UNS and, from 1974 until to 1983, he was Adjunct, Associate, and Full Professor at the 'Universidad Nacional de San Juan' in San Juan, Argentina.
In 1983, he moved to Salt Lake City, USA as Postdoctoral Fellow and soon after Research Associate for the Department of Metallurgy at the University of Utah, conducting basic Research and Development on Optimal Control of Mineral Grinding Operations.
In 1987, he left Academia and founded his own consulting company working over the years with private companies and governmental entities as DuPont, ALCOA, US Department of Transportation, NASA, and Dow Chemical. His first patent was granted in 1992 in USA, United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Japan, protecting a technology based on ultrasonic spectroscopy for measuring particle size in industrial suspensions and emulsions.
In the period 1997-2001, Felix developed a fundamental theory for the generic mathematical modeling of multiple scattering of optical and acoustical waves interacting with highly-concentrated suspensions and emulsions.
During 2001-2007, he developed a particle size analyzer based on optical spectroscopy, and commercialized a generic simulation software tool connectable to acoustic and optical spectrometers, so as to convert them into particle size analyzers. The patent for this generic technology was granted in 2007.
In 2008, Felix sold all his intellectual property to Agilent Technologies, Inc, and currently is a scientific consultant, and writes Popular Science books on Epistemology and Philosophy of Science in English and Spanish. His first book in Spanish on the Theory of Relativity was published in 2009 by the 'Ciudad de las Artes y las Ciencias, S.A.' in Valencia (Spain).
Since October 2013, Felix is back to Academia as a Research Professor for the Department of Metallurgical Engineering of the University of Utah. He is also working on the e-series 'Quantum Physics free of Folklore' of which 'Records of the Future' is its first volume published in January 2013.

Félix Alba-Juez Nació en Burgos (España) en 1948. En 1949, sus padres se establecieron en Necochea (Argentina) donde completó su educación primaria y secundaria. En 1966 se trasladó a Bahía Blanca donde se graduó en Ingeniería Eléctrica en la Universidad Nacional del Sur (UNS) en 1974. Mientras fue estudiante, se desempeñó como Asistente de Docencia en el Departamento de Matemática de la UNS. Durante los años 1974 hasta 1983, fue Profesor Adjunto, Asociado, y Titular en la Universidad Nacional de San Juan, Argentina.
En 1983, se trasladó a USA donde se desempeñó como 'Post-Doctoral Fellow' y luego 'Research Associate' en el Departamento de Metalurgia de la Universidad de Utah, conduciendo investigación básica en teoría del control óptimo, y asesorando a estudiantes de doctorado en el control óptimo de la molienda de minerales.
En 1987, se estableció como consultor independiente trabajando para entidades como DuPont, ALCOA, Dow Chemical, 'US Department of Transportation', y NASA. Su primera patente fue otorgada en 1992 en USA, Inglaterra, Francia, Alemania y Japón, protegiendo una tecnología de medición de tamaño de partícula basada en espectroscopia de ultrasonido.
Durante 1997-2001, desarrolló una nueva teoría física para modelar genéricamente la reflexión, refracción, difracción, y absorción múltiple de ondas ópticas y ultrasónicas interactuando con suspensiones altamente concentradas.
En el período 2001-2007, desarrolló un analizador de tamaño de partícula basado en espectroscopia óptica, y comercializó una herramienta de simulación genérica para conectar a espectrómetros

Reviews

[J.D. Steens · Rating 3 out of 5]

This Kindle edition is the first chapter in the author’s print edition, “Galloping with Light.” Some thoughts trying to put this together in laypersons terms:

Energy comes in two forms. Matter is characterized by its tangibility and materiality -- particles with mass (neutrons, protons and electrons) that are “transported” in their various interactions. The other form is radiant energy (light). It is characterized by its intangibility, immateriality. Though it consists of mass (amount of energy) and particles (photons), its energy is “transmitted” without matter. (1)

The distinction the author makes between material and immaterial suggests that matter is concentrated radiation energy and that the latter is dispersed - to the point of im-materialization. But this is unclear when he says that mass and energy “are not independent entities but two crucial properties of matter” or when he states that “energy is a property and not an entity in itself.” This makes it seem as though matter is primary versus energy (because energy and mass are attributes, thus, subsets of matter). But what he might be saying is that matter, is one form of energy and mass (which has materiality and tangibility and is an entity in that sense), whereas light (in its electro-magnetic, or radioactive, expression), the other form of energy, has immateriality and intangibility. (2)

The author also clarifies that Einstein’s E=MC squared applies to both the release of electro-magnetic energy (e.g, from campfires) as well as nuclear energy (where the nuclear bonds are broken). Einstein’s formula, the author emphasizes, “is as valid for a chemical reaction as it is for a nuclear reaction….the equation is valid for every conceivable physical process.” More than others, the author also delves into the role of inertia in Einstein’s formula, but probably in ways that I don’t really grasp. Why is mass defined as inertia? Nevertheless, while gravitational mass is regarded as an attractive force - or a falling toward the center, following curved space-time - inertial mass resists that movement. (3)

Given its fundamental cosmic-scale nature, the author’s reference to mass-energy seems somewhat understated. (4) He says, like most, that energy is “the capacity to do work.” What does “work” mean? Energy is a force (generally, pushing or pulling, creating movement). The capacity to do work comes in three forms - kinetic, potential and radiant energy. (5) Isn’t it the power of movement, both within an entity itself and in its interactions with others? (6) Isn’t this movement per the author’s characterization generally seen as directional - a pulling toward or a pushing away (from a specified frame of reference), and isn’t such movement a causal force that moves toward or away to maintain an equilibrium state? From the perspective (frame of reference) of a material body, it pulls an object-energy toward itself to obtain an equilibrium state and pushes an object-energy away to maintain itself? (7)

Might all of this that applies to the non-life domain apply to life itself? Energy is embodied (materialized) in a life form that moves directionally (and with intensity along the rest-activity continuum), which is to say that it is free movement to obtain energy objects (and thereby, to overcome entropy). Free movement creates reactive movements. Inertial movement is now resisting movement to maintain an equilibrium state. The interaction between two bodies occurs in a field of (non-material) energy, a tension between free movement and resisting movement results in a new equilibrium state (mutuality; or, one incorporates the other; or, one successfully defends itself).

The differences between non-life and life is that the former is about non-intentional movement to eliminate +/- differences to reach an equilibrium state, whereas for life, such states are obtained through intentional seeking (of energy objects) and defending itself against hostile object-others through resisting movement. But in essence, looking at the energetic connection between non-life and life, it can be then argued that, for non-life, matter is a vehicle for housed energy, much as life energy is DNA housed by a life form.

1. The author writes: “[M]atter distinguishes itself by its tangibility, i.e. by occupying space and being directly perceivable by our senses. When the occupied space becomes too small for our senses to perceive its direction (i.e. when dealing with the microscopic world), we will have to use other criteria based on the knowledge acquired within our macroscopic world.” While the author does not here specify what within that microscopic world, I’m thinking he means light. The distinction between matter that is transported and light that transmits is important for the author. Does this mean that, while matter interactions just happen, light is a carrier of energy via waves? There is also this question of whether “transmits” comes in the active (light transmits) or passive (light is transmitted) form.

2. Radiant energy, the author says, either transports matter (particles) via alpha and beta rays, or it transmits energy via gamma rays without the transport of matter. Late in this chapter, the author acknowledges that, while both matter and radiation are “physical objects,” the reader has to fight through old notions from classical physics where objects were material things with tangibility. Thus, matter, was seen as different from immaterial energy. But he is clear: even though non-material, radiation/light has mass, which is energy content that is carried by photon particles. This is still a hard concept to grasp because he also refers to radiation as “immaterial.” In this regard, the anti-matter discussion was particularly interesting. Electrons and positrons annihilate each other and create gamma radiation. The author asks, Does matter disappear? Or, in the reverse, is radiation converted into matter? The author reminds the reader that radiation is not the same as energy, and that unless radiation is converted, energy still exists, but in non-material form. Then, he adds, that such energy is “mysterious” as it goes back and forth between matter (particles) and energy (non-particles) in a constant in-and-out process that is all around us. But, then again, since photons are massless particles, I remain unclear, though I understand that this form of masslessness refers to rest mass, not kinetic mass.

3. Per Newton’s second law of thermodynamics, inertia is an internal force of a body to move freely and to resist being moved. Regarding Einstein’s principles of equivalence, the author also explains why differently-sized objects fall at the same rate: Greater masses have greater resistance (inertia) to movement; smaller objects have smaller inertia.

4. He refers to Einstein’s “mass-energy” in this way: “‘mass is energy and energy has mass.”

5. Kinetic energy is an object’s motion “due to its state of motion.” Potential energy is “the property of both the object itself and the field in which it is immersed.” Radiant energy is “the energy that is transmitted without transport of matter.” (It is tempting to categorize electro-magnetic energy as light - in its full spectrum - and to reserve kinetic and potential energy for tangible, material bodies where gravity applies. But I don’t think it works that way, as radiant energy involves gravitational fields, and electro-magnetism has both kinetic and potential energy.) The author breaks the atom down in a way that one can “sense” potential energy - in the “internal structure” of the atom: Protons and electrons have their own gravitational and electric fields due to mass and charges, and neutrons have their own gravitational field due to mass. These fields are composed of active energy even though a body as a whole is at rest. All of this at the atomic and subatomic level is held together (the electro-magnetic force, and the strong nuclear force), but one can almost feel the power locked in this microscopic matter should it be unleashed: this too is the capacity “to do work” - to move directionally (outward?) and with intensity, per Einstein’s E=MC squared formula.

6. Per Wheeler’s statement regarding matter and the curvature of spacetime, aren’t there really just two sources of cosmic (vs. quantum mechanics) movement: (i) Inertial mass that moves in a straight line or remains at rest, and that resists the accelerating “force” of curved spacetime; and (ii) curved spacetime created by gravitational masses?

7. With “gravity,” for example, the pulling toward is the so-called “attractive force” of gravity (but if the movement toward a larger mass is following geodesic lines of curved space-time, toward a center point, is gravity needed as a concept at all?), and the pushing away is its opposite, an inertial force that is the product of inertial mass? In addition to +/- direction, it also has intensity in the sense that the force of interaction is a product of either speed (mass increases with more speed) or distance (inverse square law, which almost suggests movement occurs via quantum-like units). As a side question, does the physical parallel between gravitational and inertial mass have a philosophical parallel with the active and passive force of yin and yang: The active force pushes an object or pulls an object but, with inertia, the affected object resists being pushed or pulled. Thus, perhaps, is there an interconnection between physical forces and philosophical notions of force?

[BetseaK · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great explanation of the famous equation! Oh, yeah! Finally!
No matter how unbelievable it may be, that weird term 'a massless particle' now makes sense to me.

Actually, it all depends on what is meant by physics terms such as 'mass','matter', 'energy' etc. And this book explains it so very well.

As it excellently describes what you can expect from this e-book, here I also quote an excerpt related to Chapter 1 of "Galloping with Light", taken from the review by Matts Roos:

"Although most readers probably think that they know what is meant by mass, weight, force, and energy, perhaps also by inertia, gravitation, and momentum, FAJ devotes his first chapter to elucidate these concepts. Here and in every following chapter he first discusses the epistemology and history of the concepts, clarifying the semantics and fighting like a Don Quixote against misconceptions. Surprisingly, this approach makes an absolutely fascinating reading, a cultural Odyssey through the roots of physics."