The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?  (Read 9020 times)

Offline 5nutjob

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 43
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« on: 21/11/2010 12:01:04 »
Ever wondered why there's a strange similarity between mass energy & kinetic energy equations: E=mc^2 & E= 0.5mv^2 ?

What's very odd;- is the relationship between energy, velocity (albeit the velocity of light in E=mc^2) and mass in these equations, is they differ by a factor of 50%. i.e;- kinetic energy only involves half mass?

What if;- when mass gains momentum via acceleration, only half the total net energy gain is measured? By this, I'm implying, all corresponding anti-particles of those which constitute said mass are given the other 50% instantaneously - this concept suggests both particle & anti-particle belong to just one overall structure of hyperspatial design. Also makes both relationships identical - funny that!  [:o)]


 

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 582
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #1 on: 21/11/2010 21:31:08 »
At non relativistic speeds, E = MC^2 + 1/2 MV^2. If V=0, E = MC^2... Why? Because a particle is made of a photon rotating at the speed of light, its accelerated momentum toward the center of the particle generates its gravitational field (M)... When a particle is created, the door of time dimension opens...
« Last Edit: 21/11/2010 21:36:31 by CPT ArkAngel »
 

Offline 5nutjob

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 43
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #2 on: 21/11/2010 22:31:16 »
Because a particle is made of a photon rotating at the speed of light, its accelerated momentum toward the center of the particle generates its gravitational field
[xx(]

Like, wow! ....... I suggest you should immediately refrain from using your head as an ice-hockey puck.
 

Offline JP

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3366
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #3 on: 22/11/2010 04:44:08 »
Ever wondered why there's a strange similarity between mass energy & kinetic energy equations: E=mc^2 & E= 0.5mv^2 ?

Those equations tell you two completely different things, so comparing them doesn't tell you much.  The first is about relativistic energy 'bound up in' the mass of an object, and the second is the kinetic energy of a non-relativistic object.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8645
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #4 on: 22/11/2010 07:21:36 »
"Ever wondered why there's a strange similarity between mass energy & kinetic energy equations:"
No, they have to be similar because the units have to match.

There are also a raft of similar energy terms like E= 1/2 C V^2 which have similar forms because they arise from integration of something.
 

Offline 5nutjob

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 43
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #5 on: 22/11/2010 18:14:55 »
Ever wondered why there's a strange similarity between mass energy & kinetic energy equations: E=mc^2 & E= 0.5mv^2 ?

Those equations tell you two completely different things, so comparing them doesn't tell you much.  The first is about relativistic energy 'bound up in' the mass of an object, and the second is the kinetic energy of a non-relativistic object.

Nevertheless, we have a vivid discrepancy in the relationships between energy, velocity and mass, existing between each equation; thus, this is not a clear 'apples and oranges' variety of idiocy. I merely attempted to resolve, by means of a Sherlock Holmeseque “When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” type of approach jazz.   [:I]

 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8645
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #6 on: 22/11/2010 19:09:28 »
There's a book called "why does E =MC2?"
I commend it to you.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Why-Does-mc2-Should-Care/dp/0306817586

(other textbooks are available)
 

Offline JP

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3366
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #7 on: 22/11/2010 23:26:43 »
...thus, this is not a clear 'apples and oranges' variety of idiocy.

I wouldn't say it's clear or that it's idiocy, but it is apples and oranges. 

This question, and a lot of the questions you're asking on the forum, could be easily answered if you read some textbooks on physics or chemistry, or if you were willing to listen to explanations from those who have studied those subjects.  However, you don't seem willing to do so.
 

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 582
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #8 on: 23/11/2010 02:16:08 »
Link removed for possible copyright issues.

If you can show that the link to "Why Does E=MC2" doesn't violate copyright, the link can be reposted.

Thanks,
The Moderators

hi jp, you cannot print it or copy it... so i think it is ok... If you go all the way down, you have the copyright information but it is not clear.
« Last Edit: 23/11/2010 14:33:17 by peppercorn »
 

Offline JP

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3366
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #9 on: 23/11/2010 07:29:35 »
Hmm... are you sure?  The link at the bottom only says that submissions are checked automatically against a list of copyrighted works, not that this particular work is protected.  Also, it seems like you can print it or copy it if you sign up for a scribd account.  I'll check with the site admins to see if they think it's reasonable to link to the book.  Until then, I'd rather not post the link just to be safe.  Sorry for the inconvenience, but it's better to be safe than sorry.
 

Offline BenV

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1503
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #10 on: 23/11/2010 11:05:04 »
Link removed for possible copyright issues.

If you can show that the link to "Why Does E=MC2" doesn't violate copyright, the link can be reposted.

Thanks,
The Moderators

hi jp, you cannot print it or copy it... so i think it is ok... If you go all the way down, you have the copyright information but it is not clear. www.scribd.com
Hi CPT - this looks a lot like copwright infringement to me - I'm with JP, I'd rather not risk it. I know I would be angry if someone had posted a book I wrote verbatim online!
 

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 582
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #11 on: 23/11/2010 14:29:12 »
yes you are totally right. The guy who made the book available on this site is in India...
 

Offline 5nutjob

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 43
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #12 on: 23/11/2010 18:21:43 »
...thus, this is not a clear 'apples and oranges' variety of idiocy.

  but it is apples and oranges. 


So a relationship that exists between energy, mass and velocity is clearly very different from one that happens with energy, mass and velocity? [:o)]

This question, and a lot of the questions you're asking on the forum, could be easily answered if you read some textbooks on physics or chemistry, or if you were willing to listen to explanations from those who have studied those subjects.  However, you don't seem willing to do so.

Answered?? ..... certainly not;- Incidentally, I can be insanely enthusiastic, with attention focus a-go-go, but only if the advice has some concrete reasoning, and this is so astoundingly not happening here.  [:I]
 

Offline peppercorn

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1466
    • View Profile
    • solar
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #13 on: 23/11/2010 18:33:25 »
Answered?? ..... certainly not;- Incidentally, I can be insanely enthusiastic, with attention focus a-go-go, but only if the advice has some concrete reasoning, and this is so astoundingly not happening here.  [:I]

You are in the tiniest majority who seem to have problems with the advice and learning of this site.  Do you suppose it's possible that even a tiny part of the difficulty lays with your resistance to comprehension and not with the regular and respected contributors to the physics and related forum boards on this site?
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #14 on: 23/11/2010 18:46:54 »
I can be insanely enthusiastic, with attention focus a-go-go, but only if the advice has some concrete reasoning, and this is so astoundingly not happening here.  [:I]


Apparently, your academic brilliance is only surpassed by your profound modesty.
 

Offline 5nutjob

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 43
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #15 on: 23/11/2010 19:02:49 »
Answered?? ..... certainly not;- Incidentally, I can be insanely enthusiastic, with attention focus a-go-go, but only if the advice has some concrete reasoning, and this is so astoundingly not happening here.  [:I]

You are in the tiniest majority who seem to have problems with the advice and learning of this site.  Do you suppose it's possible that even a tiny part of the difficulty lays with your resistance to comprehension and not with the regular and respected contributors to the physics and related forum boards on this site?

Yeah, it's possible;- but only in the most teeniest, weeniest, itsy, bitsy, barely perceivable manner ..... even when using a atomic force microscope coupled to a James Webb space telescope, plugged into a 27 trillion watt Marshall PA (in high gain mode set @ 11!) after having ones ears syringed, immediately after emerging from a 3 month spell in a sensory deprivation tank ..... I completely admit it. [:I]
« Last Edit: 23/11/2010 19:25:53 by 5nutjob »
 

Post by peppercorn click to view.

Offline peppercorn

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1466
    • View Profile
    • solar
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #16 on: 23/11/2010 19:49:39 »
Shrunk
Yeah, it's possible;- but only in the most teeniest, weeniest, itsy, bitsy, barely perceivable manner ....
..... I completely admit it. [:I]

Well, they say, its what you do with it that counts...  ... Oh, dear! :-X


Also you seem to have the most unrelated use of the blush smiley [ [:I] ] 've ever seen. :D
 

Post by 5nutjob click to view.

Offline 5nutjob

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 43
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #17 on: 23/11/2010 20:00:09 »
Shrunk
Well, they say, its what you do with it that counts.

Sure, I use mine as a gondola pole, but only when un-aroused with an immoderately gargantuan ice-pack down me strides.  [:I]

« Last Edit: 23/11/2010 20:16:27 by 5nutjob »
 

Post by 5nutjob click to view.

Offline 5nutjob

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 43
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #18 on: 23/11/2010 20:06:58 »
Shrunk
Also you seem to have the most unrelated use of the blush smiley [ [:I] ] 've ever seen. :D

Yeah, but isn't it mindslashingly annoying? [:I]
« Last Edit: 23/11/2010 20:17:52 by 5nutjob »
 

Post by 5nutjob click to view.

Offline 5nutjob

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 43
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #19 on: 23/11/2010 20:20:14 »
Shrunk
I can be insanely enthusiastic, with attention focus a-go-go, but only if the advice has some concrete reasoning, and this is so astoundingly not happening here.  [:I]


Apparently, your academic brilliance is only surpassed by your profound modesty.

Sure, tell me more!
 

Offline QuantumClue

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 613
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #20 on: 23/11/2010 20:51:11 »
There's a book called "why does E =MC2?"
I commend it to you.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Why-Does-mc2-Should-Care/dp/0306817586

(other textbooks are available)

It an ''ok'' book. I'd prefer the OP to read E=Mc^2 by David (forget the second name). Very good book. More impressed with it than the other one by Brian Cox.
 

Offline peppercorn

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1466
    • View Profile
    • solar
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #21 on: 23/11/2010 21:07:20 »
Funny how things unexpectedly shrink away to nothing - Posts, I mean of course :D
 

Offline QuantumClue

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 613
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #22 on: 23/11/2010 22:33:12 »
Funny how things unexpectedly shrink away to nothing - Posts, I mean of course :D
Slightly.

Expecting it to happen to mine too.
 

Offline JP

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3366
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #23 on: 24/11/2010 02:48:21 »
This question, and a lot of the questions you're asking on the forum, could be easily answered if you read some textbooks on physics or chemistry, or if you were willing to listen to explanations from those who have studied those subjects.  However, you don't seem willing to do so.

Answered?? ..... certainly not;- Incidentally, I can be insanely enthusiastic, with attention focus a-go-go, but only if the advice has some concrete reasoning, and this is so astoundingly not happening here.  [:I]


You're too brilliant to learn from a textbook and yet you consistently get fundamental things wrong in your explanations?  The question you're asking here can be answered easily, but to get at the "why" of them, you need to understand some basic physics.  Unless someone has the time to teach you basic mechanics and relativity over the forum, your best bet to get that competency is to read some books.

I've been looking for an excuse to post this for a while, so here's Feynman on why certain things are hard to explain, especially when you lack the fundamentals:

 

Offline peppercorn

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1466
    • View Profile
    • solar
Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #24 on: 24/11/2010 11:12:31 »
The question you're asking here can be answered easily, but to get at the "why" of them, you need to understand some basic physics.  Unless someone has the time to teach you basic mechanics and relativity over the forum, your best bet to get that competency is to read some books.

I've been looking for an excuse to post this for a while, so here's Feynman on why certain things are hard to explain, especially when you lack the fundamentals:

At this stage I would really like one of those 'good answer' buttons that some other forums employ. Really nice video link BTW!
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Kinetic Energy - Only Half of the 'Picture'?
« Reply #24 on: 24/11/2010 11:12:31 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums