Curiosity about E=mc^2

Forums Forums Physics and Philosophy Curiosity about E=mc^2

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
  • #13167
    Israel Socratus

    Curiosity about quantum energy/mass: E=mc²


    1 – E=MC² is equivalent to M=E/C² and vice versa.

    2 – Equivalence between energy and mass in the quantum

    microcosmos means that we are dealing with a specific,

    pure energy / mass particle: E = MC², M = E / C²

    3 – This pure mass/energy E = mc² is a part of SRT and according

    to the rule of Lorentz transformations can be changed.

    4 – SRT and Lorentz transformations cannot be ignored

    in the theory of quantum particle physics.


    1- The E= mc^2 is pure energy/mass particle (all mass is energy)

    2 – E=mc^2 can be in a ”rest”- potential state

    3 – E=mc^2 can be in active state (destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki)

    4 – According to Einstein E=mc^2 is responsible for “inertial” movement

    5 – According to Dirac (1928) Einstein’s ‘’inertial’’ E=mc^2 has dualistic

    nature E= ± mc^2 and must obey

    “The law of conservation and transformation of energy/mass” and

    therefore, so called “matter-antimatter” must be two sides of one

    and the same “coin” of the quantum particle.

    6- How does E=MC² link to the Lorentz transformations?

    (The unity depends on “The law of conservation and

    transformation of energy/mass”)


    In 1927 the theme of the fifth Solvay Conference on Physics was:

    “Electrons and Photons”. This problem is still unsolved

    Ashish Dalela

    Mass is a type of potential energy, and what we called “energy” is that which we can perceive as motion. The nature of the potential energy called “mass” is not fully understood in science. Mass is just a number that quantifies the potential energy, but the nature of that potentiality is not known in science. Energy on the other hand can be observed as motion. So, Einstein produced a formula that indicates a method to compute visible energy into potential energy, and vice versa.

    To understand the nature of mass you have to dig deeper into the nature of space. Space has structural properties just like an organization has a hierarchical structure. When that structure is destroyed, then everything starts moving freely, and we call that free motion “energy”. You can convert that free motion into a structure and that visible energy becomes hidden, and it is called “mass”. The structure resists changes, so “mass” is equated to inertial resistance to change. However, the mass is not the property of the individual particle; it is the property of a structure. This realization is partly embodied in general relativity where mass is just the property of space.

    So if mass is the structure of space, then what is the particle in that space? It is the other quantum properties called charge, color, isospin, charm, etc. These are words that nobody understands, and nobody wants to understand. They just want to reconcile the structure of space with the other particle properties, and they can never achieve that because particles and structures are fundamentally different categories. Hence a quantum theory of mass is impossible.

    If you want to know more about this, then you can read the book Time and Consciousness.

    I’ve been seeing you speculate endlessly for many years, and always trying to solve your ideological problems within the framework of current physics. Earlier it was T=0K, now it is something else. But have you considered the possibility that maybe these problems are not solvable in the current thinking? In fact, current thinking produces these problems and the problem indicates the necessity to change your thinking? You have assumed that you will solve your problems in your way of thinking, but that may not be true? You can spend your life in this futility, and unlike the other professional physicists who are getting paid to do this work, you are getting nothing in return.

    Every area of modern science is riddled with numerous paradoxes which are unsolvable in the current thinking. And people like your good self don’t want to change their way of thinking. You have this childish desire to grasp reality by your mind, but you don’t want to change your mind. But consider the possibility that your mind is a container whose shape doesn’t match the shape of reality. Since you cannot fit the reality in your mind, and you cannot change the shape of reality, your only option is to change the shape of your mind. And that is something you don’t want to do.

    So, this entire exercise is one of futility and frustration that only ends with our death. It becomes a life lived in vain. And that’s because a meaningful life requires us to change ourselves. But the entire Western civilization is opposed to that idea. They think: We are already perfect; we are endowed with perfect minds using which we can understand nature, force her to answer all our questions, and thereby gain control over nature. You don’t know that nature is playing with you. You are just like an ant in a hole; you try to climb out of the hole, and nature puffs at you, and you fall again to the bottom of the hole. And you keep doing this up and down process repeatedly, endlessly.

    Modern science began in Newton’s theory of gravitation and for over 300 years you thought you were climbing out of the hole of ignorance. Then nature puffs at you, and you discover dark matter which is 95% of the universe (by current calculations) but you cannot detect it anywhere in any laboratory experiment. So now science has fallen into the bottom of the hole again, and you have to start fresh. And nobody has a clue on how to start climbing afresh. All the so-called great theories of science are worthless at this point because they cannot explain 95% of the universe, and even the 5% they explain is probabilistic. And even those probabilities are stilted upon dozens of unexplained and arbitrary constants and properties that nobody knows how to understand or explain.

    In 300 years this is all science has achieved. And you are still enthusiastic about finding answers through current science. That makes me wonder: Are you too blind to acknowledge the failure?

    We have a story that explains your predicament. A man was passing through a jungle and night fell. He heard a tiger roaring and out of fear he climbed a tree. On the top of the tree is a snake. Two mice are cutting the branch on which this man is hanging. And the tiger is waiting under the tree for the man to fall. He cannot go up and he cannot go down. Meanwhile, a drop of honey falls from a honeycomb into his mouth. He licks that honey and says: My life is alright; I can lick the honey.

    Modern science is just like that. You cannot solve any real problem of life–death, old age, disease, suffering. But you lick a drop of honey called technology and say: This is perfect. We have progressed. Earlier we could not lick this honey, and now we can. And you forget about the impending catastrophe caused either by the mice, or the tiger, or the snake. You just remain satisfied by licking the honey. So, this is called illusion. There is simply no viable plan to get out of the situation, and instead of thinking of an exit strategy, we say: This is not so bad after all.

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)