C Squared

This is my first post here. I've noticed the last post here was back in 2003. So as not to start a new topic I will just add my post here.

My thoughts follow the topic of this group of post and that is I would like to share my thoughts about Einstein's equation E=MC^2.

My main point is the C^2 part. I have not found any notes of Einstein's thoughts on how he came up with C^2. He has stated nothing can move faster than C and yet the equation contains twice the speed of light in the form of C^2. This tells me Einstein knew more than he was telling. He could not just of come up with the equation and said well it fits and looks good so I will just use it. I believe he knew what I have found out. I don't want to get into what I have found out yet but rather see if anybody can point me to his thoughts on this or add some thoughts of their own. I will answer what I feel and found out if there is an interest. Thank you for your time.

Cheers,
Spacedust [^]

The only option if man is going to reach the Stars in a lifetime is to master both Space and Time. Warp Technology today!

Welcome to this forum Spacedust, I myself havent been here for too long but Im already gotten some serius thinking going after spending my time here.

E=mC^2 is for me something that you learn in school. Sadly most things I learn there I´ve been just gathering like a sponge and never any questions. Therefore I neither got an answear to your question, Hope someone of those "smartguys" who tend to question what they are thought will see this thread soon enough.
Anyway, welcome

The puzzle over C^2 is of great interest to me-I am the one who asked about it a year ago. It seems to me it gets the same result as "A" does in f=mA. This topic is much more tangled than it appears.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Spacedust</i>
<br />This is my first post here. I've noticed the last post here was back in 2003. So as not to start a new topic I will just add my post here.

My thoughts follow the topic of this group of post and that is I would like to share my thoughts about Einstein's equation E=MC^2.

My main point is the C^2 part. I have not found any notes of Einstein's thoughts on how he came up with C^2. He has stated nothing can move faster than C and yet the equation contains twice the speed of light in the form of C^2. This tells me Einstein knew more than he was telling. He could not just of come up with the equation and said well it fits and looks good so I will just use it. I believe he knew what I have found out. I don't want to get into what I have found out yet but rather see if anybody can point me to his thoughts on this or add some thoughts of their own. I will answer what I feel and found out if there is an interest. Thank you for your time.

Cheers,
Spacedust [^]

The only option if man is going to reach the Stars in a lifetime is to master both Space and Time. Warp Technology today!
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

E=mc^2 relates the energy as a function of "c" and "m". It does not say anything about the speed of light. Thus, we can perfectly have E&gt;c as a <b>numerical</b> inequality, but the units do not match.

Jim,

Sorry for having left the forum so abruptly, I would like to add only this:
I realized that I was missing an important variable in the equation:
since the distance from the center of inertia of a body is so important, the equation should actually look like this:

E=ma.dt

I guess you will laugh at this, since we already have such an equation for potential energy: E=mgh
but the interpretation is much different: you can throw away the "g" since it varies within a system, and "h" is irrelevant in space. (A distance should be used.)

If the distance "d" in the equation tends to zero (close to the center of inertia), and the law of conservation of energy is valid, then something has to happen to "m" and "a": I think "m" has to accelerate.

An accelerating atom is one which converts its energy (or mass) in the process.

According to this, particles which accelerate at speeds near the speed of light have very little mass.

Most scientists today will tell you that experiments with particle accelerators has confirmed that mass actually increases.
This is because they are using millions of electon volts to push a stable atom (the test particle) across the circuit to hit a target. Obviously it carries quite a punch!

In space though, the atom uses its own energy to accelerate. This would confirm the theory that the atom's entropy varies with its position in a system.

If this theory is valid, then the law of conservation of energy is true, but we should also consider the following:

- The term "gravity" is no longer valid.
- conservation of momentum is false.
- E=mc^2 indicates only the amount of energy available.
- E=1/2mv^2 is an empirical value that will change with time.
-Work= F.d is not true everywhere in space: At maximum entropy no work is possible.

Other equations will also have to be reviewed: All equations referring to linear motion.
(All equations pertaining to linear forces or motion have their exact counterpart in rotational motion.)
If we observe all motions of bodies in space, these rotate about low potential energy areas of space (the center of inertia of massive bodies) even light bends in the presence of massive bodies in space.

This is the way we perceive the universe today. This order will certainly change over the next billion years.

Einstein's theory of relativity is correct according to the entropy theory: Energy is conserved, matter, space, and time are relative.

(If it is shown that the solar system is not accelerating, then you can discard this crap in the garbage.)

Hi GD, It seems to me(and I admit beforehand I may be wrong)you are building a new model which you should keep working on. Making models is as someone said above a lot of fun and we learn by the process. I have one question-what are you going to substitute for gravity? The way entrophy works in your model is very interesting, can you post more about this detail?