8/14/2019 Limits of Nature

1/2

Einsteins equation

It is very surprising not to see any constant in the Einsteins legendary equation E=mc 2 . HereE is energy in Joules, m is mass in kg and c is velocity of light is m/s. I very strongly believethat the correct equation should be E=kmc 2. Here k is a constant without unit.Einsteins equation looks very impressive to a layman or a person who knows basics of

kinematics. But the equations of kinetic energy Ek = m v2 are not praised as much as

Einsteins equation. Lets relook at Einsteins equation. If on the day on which 1 kg was definedas a certain mass ( and an object of that mass was kept in Frances some place) has they keptan object with double or some other mass, would this equation have been E=1/2mc 2? Similarly,if the 1m was defined in some other way (say half the current length) , would the equation havehave been E=4mc 2? Let us accept that there is relation between mass and energy, but relationbetween mass and energy of an object in SI units with a constant as velocity of light somethingelse ( even this is fine) in SI unit (this is too much) as constant is questionable.

The nuclear experiments are difficult to measure. Above that, when atoms with around 100protons , 100 neutrons and 100 electrons react, only 3-4 electrons (1000 times lighter bodies)are said to be converted to mass. This is like measuring loss of 3-4 units in 300,000 units. Sothere is no way of confirming this equation. That is why all the yield stuff is mostly disputed.

On more interesting side, one should calculate the mass loss rate of the Sun (kg/day) as theSun is radiating (energy, hence mass) stuff madly. If that number is a serious number, it wouldaffect the gravitational pull of sun on earth in long-term (it will reduce the gravitational pull). Thereduction is gravitational pull should result in earth going away from Sun and getting colder andthen cold enough to make it a non-living mars. If sun is very old (say some million years) and

even hotter earlier means it had more mass, more gravitational pull and the planets were closerto it than now. It also means that all the planets beyond earth once had livable atmosphere (atleast temperature) when they were at suitable distance from sun.

Coming back to Einsteins equation, why only the last statement is taught school? Why thederivation is not written in Indian Schools that are otherwise so notorious about asking damnboring theory (that what students call derivations) in examinations. I very strongly believe theresomething fundamentally wrong with this equation (which 12 th class students can discuss). Youneed not subscribe to my view.

8/14/2019 Limits of Nature

2/2

Einsteins equation

It is very surprising not to see any constant in the Einsteins legendary equation E=mc 2 . HereE is energy in Joules, m is mass in kg and c is velocity of light is m/s. I very strongly believethat the correct equation should be E=kmc 2. Here k is a constant without unit.Einsteins equation looks very impressive to a layman or a person who knows basics of

kinematics. But the equations of kinetic energy Ek = m v2 are not praised as much as

Einsteins equation. Lets relook at Einsteins equation. If on the day on which 1 kg was definedas a certain mass ( and an object of that mass was kept in Frances some place) has they keptan object with double or some other mass, would this equation have been E=1/2mc 2? Similarly,if the 1m was defined in some other way (say half the current length) , would the equation havehave been E=4mc 2? Let us accept that there is relation between mass and energy, but relationbetween mass and energy of an object in SI units with a constant as velocity of light somethingelse ( even this is fine) in SI unit (this is too much) as constant is questionable.

The nuclear experiments are difficult to measure. Above that, when atoms with around 100protons , 100 neutrons and 100 electrons react, only 3-4 electrons (1000 times lighter bodies)are said to be converted to mass. This is like measuring loss of 3-4 units in 300,000 units. Sothere is no way of confirming this equation. That is why all the yield stuff is mostly disputed.

On more interesting side, one should calculate the mass loss rate of the Sun (kg/day) as theSun is radiating (energy, hence mass) stuff madly. If that number is a serious number, it wouldaffect the gravitational pull of sun on earth in long-term (it will reduce the gravitational pull). Thereduction is gravitational pull should result in earth going away from Sun and getting colder andthen cold enough to make it a non-living mars. If sun is very old (say some million years) and

even hotter earlier means it had more mass, more gravitational pull and the planets were closerto it than now. It also means that all the planets beyond earth once had livable atmosphere (atleast temperature) when they were at suitable distance from sun.

Coming back to Einsteins equation, why only the last statement is taught school? Why thederivation is not written in Indian Schools that are otherwise so notorious about asking damnboring theory (that what students call derivations) in examinations. I very strongly believe theresomething fundamentally wrong with this equation (which 12 th class students can discuss). Youneed not subscribe to my view.