Print

Print


Christophe Grandsire nevesht:
>
>En réponse à Nik Taylor <[log in to unmask]>:
>
> >
> > How is E=mc^2 misquoted?
> >
>
>It doesn't mean anything when quoted this way. The correct formula is
>E=gamma*mc^2, and it's this gamma which is the most important for
>Einstein's
>Relativity Theory. It's equal to 1 over square root of 1 minus v^2/c^2, v
>being
>the speed of the object, c of course the speed of light. The formula E=mc^2
>is
>valid only when v=0 (for that reason, E0=mc^2 is called the resting energy
>or
>mass energy of the object. If it was quoted as E0=mc^2, I wouldn't have
>anything against it, because E0 and E are different things), which is a
>very
>specialised case of the correct formula, and a stupid one at that, since if
>the
>object is at rest you don't need Relativity to explain its behaviour
>(actually,
>it would be stupid to do so! Restricted Relativity is only interested in
>the
>behaviour of objects whose speed is near the speed of light).
>
>In that sense E=mc^2 is a misquote: it refers to a special case of the
>correct
>formula where it is nonsensical to use this formula at all!
>
Also in the original he used "S" not "E"




-Wayne Chevrier






_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail