Smart Challenges Einstein's Equation E = mc^2

If mass can never reach the speed of light, so how is it he uses the speed
of light to convert mass into energy?

Einstein used QM, so he must be wrong too.

Kinetic Energy = 1/2 m v^2

E = m c^2

, is just like the kinetic energy equation except (v) velocity is replaced
with the speed of light.

Therefore, Einstein is WRONG, because he used QM. This equation might work
in a black hole although because the speed of light can be reached. So I won't
say it is totally wrong.

And as far as this bull corn about mass being totally converted into energy
is incorrect. In an atomic explosion, many new particles and atoms are made in
the splitting of an atom like Uranium238. Nothing is totally converted into
just energy on this planet. So E = mc^2 is incorrect. It is used today as an
approximation of values but in reality it is not correct. ONLY The Smart Model
is correct.


S. Enterprize Co. (Membership)
http://www.s-enterprize.com/
S. Enterprize (Science Journal)
http://smart1234.s-enterprize.com/

(S. Enterprize Company) wrote in message ...
Smart Challenges Einstein's Equation E = mc^2

If mass can never reach the speed of light, so how is it he uses the speed
of light to convert mass into energy?

Einstein used QM, so he must be wrong too.

Kinetic Energy = 1/2 m v^2

E = m c^2

, is just like the kinetic energy equation except (v) velocity is replaced
with the speed of light.


The two equations have nothing to do with eachother, except that they
both relate energy to mass through the use of velocity. But that is
simply a coincidence, due to the fact that energy is expressed in
units of mass times distance squared over duration squared.

Therefore, Einstein is WRONG, because he used QM. This equation might work
in a black hole although because the speed of light can be reached. So I won't
say it is totally wrong.


Well then things should have infinite mass when going into a black
hole due to relativistic mass increase, since they are accelerated to
the speed of light.

And as far as this bull corn about mass being totally converted into energy
is incorrect. In an atomic explosion, many new particles and atoms are made in
the splitting of an atom like Uranium238. Nothing is totally converted into
just energy on this planet. So E = mc^2 is incorrect. It is used today as an
approximation of values but in reality it is not correct. ONLY The Smart Model
is correct.


However, Uranium238 has more mass than the total sum of the mass of
the resulting atoms combined. That mass difference is multiplied by
c^2 to get the total amount of energy. And in larger amounts of
Uranium238, that is a LOT! That's why you get nuclear explosions.


S. Enterprize Co. (Membership)
http://www.s-enterprize.com/
S. Enterprize (Science Journal)
http://smart1234.s-enterprize.com/

You are so stupid, that it's fun to laugh at you.

Hah hah hah hah haa! *Laughs at from Stupid
Enterprize Corporation.* You're so dumb! *Points and laughs some
more.*

(...Starblade Riven Darksquall...)

On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 09:45:35 -0400, Steve Emmett
wrote:

You probably should do just a smidge of research before you make your
claims.

Einstein published the energy-mass equivalence relationship you list
below around 1905. The develpment of quantum mechanics, as a DISTINCT
discipline, started in the early 1920's.



Actually, the roots of QM go all the way back to 19th century
spectroscopy with characters such as Bunsen and Kirchoff. Most people
place the beginnings of QM in 1900 with Planck's modification of the
Wein radiation displacement law. Einstein used this result in 1905 to
successfully explain the photo-electric effect, although his
publications that same year in special relativity, including E = mc^2,
were completely independent of them. For the most part, you're
correct about QM not really getting started until the 20's, because
that's when it starting kicking into high gear with things such as
Compton scattering, Bohr's atomic model, and de Broglie's matter
waves.