"Leonardo Been" wrote in message
news | Nothing remarkable indeed, because, as "Jacques" pointed out:
|
| 'Thus Einstein's E = mc2 is actually derived from Newtonian Mechanics.'
|
| It does however not seem to answer the original poster's question.

You do not however seem to have the intelligence to make the connection or
know who said what.
Try another pseudonym, maybe that will work.
*plonk*


| _____________
| On Sun, 11 May 2008 17:51:50 +0100, Androcles wrote:
|
|
| "Jacques" wrote in message
| ...
| | Hi everybody,
| |
| | I have a question which bothers me since long time and maybe with your
| help
| | I can find the answer at last. Since I heard the formule E=mc^2 for
the
| | first time it struck me that there seems to be no logical relation
| | between the energy contained in a mass and the speed of light. I have
| | no difficulties to understand that the energy contained in a mass is
| equivalent
| | to that mass.
| |
| | My problem is: what the hell has this to do with the speed of
something
| else
| | (an electromagnetic wave). I cannot see the connection between them.
| | These two things: mass and energy on one side and the speed of light
on
| | the
| other
| | side seem too disparate to me to allow a logical link between them.
| |
| | I wonder, if someone can explain this connection. I wouldn't have been
| | surprised if the Joule (the unit for energy) had been established in
| | consequence of this formula, but I think both Joule, kg, m/s were
| | already existent before E=mc^2.
| |
| | I learned from Wikipedia that James Joule died in 1889, thus before
| Einstein
| | discovered his famous formula, which I think happened in 1905.
| |
| Nothing remarkable about it all.
| http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde.../DeriveMC2.htm
| http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/MC2.htm
|