It is just E=pc for photons

With no rest mass m.

Instead p= h/ lambda

Lambda is the wavelength

E=mvc is the good formula for a particle with mass. But is this formula has been tested experimentally? My response is no! To test this formula people should determine experimentally the intrinsic energy of an electron. But till now this thing is not done. In fact people should detrmine λ for the electron. And should derive the correspondent v using the de Broglie equation v=h/mλ. To derive λ people should recour to the experimental results in muonic hydrogen an deuterium. But people don't uderstand these results! Determining the intrinsic energy of the electron should lead to a determining of the maximal energy of the electron. Which should be reach in the sun! And according to de Boglie equation the correspondent v should be about the speed of light. In fact E=mvc gives every thing for a particle with a mass so what is this E=mcc? and why Einstein equalise it with E=hf? I have the response! De Broglie should find a link between his λ and the Compton wavelength but he has not make it it is then a lacune for de Broglie equation. That is why Einstein understood this lacuna of de Broglie and profitate from it. Einstein equalises therefore E=mcc with E=hf? Till now this thing of Einstein don't let people to understand the good meaning of the λ of de Broglie. In fact what is the absolute meaning of λ? it is the wavelength of what? People say E=mcc is not to applicate for photons because they are massless. E=mvc should be use to estimate the energy of a particle at rest when v is near the speed of light which is v for an electron in the sun. It stay to applicate E=mcc for the energy of photons where m is the mass of a photon! Or an other solution considering E=mcc obsolete. For a particle with mass E=mvc where v

No, its not good for massine particles.

There you have to sum ke plus pe

Or use E=mcc depending on the context.

Its all been tested in variou experiments.

Read basic physics.

E=hf is the same as E= pc for photons.

You are kind of confused for now.

Juan Weisz,

When a photon is emitted in the jump from for example from level n=2 to n=1 what should be the equation and the value of the energy of the photon? And what should be the equation and the value of the energy for the electron which is a particle having mass?

Juan Weisz,

When a photon is emitted during the jump for example from level n=2 to n=1 what should be the equation and the value of the energy of the photon and what should be the equation and the value of the energy of the electron which is a particle with mass?

What do you think produces the photon? Is it the charge inside the electron like I think? In my opinion, the charge is an antenna for receiving and transmitting electromagnetic waves. The charge should accelerate to produce a photon! this happens when jumping for example from level n = 2 to level n = 1. If after a hundred years, we only digest what Einstein taught us without developing it, we remain stuck! This is actually the big problem. I said that the best formula for the particle is E=vcm and there is a corresponding photon E=hf. Everything is played out between the Planck and de Broglie formulas. Einstein has nothing here! That is what I think.

hf is the energy difference between the two levels.

Can you name just one particle? What internal structure they have?

Juan Weisz,

Javad Fardaei,

There is a close link between the intrinsic energy of the electon and the transition energies in an atom. There are experiments who prove this. They are the experiments in muonic hydrogen and deuterium. My articles give 0.87564 fm for the radius of the proton which will be confirmend by the new CODATA value for the proton radius . And my value for the radius of the neutron is 0. 8775 fm also will be confirmed by the CODATA. Everything should be in link. The muonic experiments in H-D provide a tresor of information. According to me they confirm the two small radii but they also maintain the value of the radius of the proton of before 2010. The intrinsic energy of the electron is not yet known in physics that is why people do not understand well the link between E=vcm and E=hf. Which is the link between the formula for a particle whith a mass and photons energies. For me the electrons are transporter of energies in an atom. The electron is simply a 'relativistic worker" efficient 100%. Why not!

The intrinsic or mass energy of a particle

is just E=mcc, m= gamma m(0)

Juan Weisz,

No. The intrinsic energy of a particle is E=vcm. And the equivalent photon Energy is E=h(c/λ).The intrinsic energy is not the mass energy. E=mcc is not a fundamental equation for a particle with mass. E=vcm is the absolute equation for a particle with mass. E=mcc could be the energy photons but here photons should have masses!

Jamil

Sorry, I dont know where you got E=mvc, its not accepted physics. Wont discuss further this point.

Do not confuse the momentum of a photon with the momentum of a moving mass (mv). The later is only used if there

is some rest mass m(0).

Perhaps you would like better another form for E=mcc

its

EE=ppcc+m(0)m(0)cccc

If the rest mass is zero m(0)=0 you are left with the photon energy.

m=gamma m(0) is velocity dependent through gamma=1/sqrt(1-vv/cc)

You must understand all terms and do algebra.

Read

Feyman, Leighton, Sands

or Beiser

Juan Weisz,

For me, the equation gamma=1/sqrt(1-vv/cc) is a very important equation for calculations of the fundamental constants of an atom, especially for calculations relating to protons and neutrons, including their masses. But its usage differs a little from what Einstein taught us. That is to say if you copy and paste what Einstein suggested, you will understand nothing. For me Einstein wanted at all costs to impose his equation E=mcc to use it with that E=hf and gamma=1/sqrt(1-vv/cc) for a particle with mass. He's right but it shouldn't be done the way he did it. I think you have to be very careful. To understand what I am saying we must calculate the intrinsic energy of the electron. Because electron and photon there is something that links them. Once this thing is determined we can then understand what v and λ are in de Broglie's equation. So we see that it is E=vcm which is fundamental for a particle and not E=ccm. As for me I see that E=mcc is absolute unless it is used for the energies of the photons with E=hf but then the photons will have masses it will be of the order of ten to the power of minus forty seven grams etc. . E=vcm is proven by muonic experiments in H-D but people already don't understand the results of these experiments!

The quantum de Broglie eq. is what is shared between photon or mass, with

adequate interpretation.

The mass of an electron is measured,

not calculated.

Jamil Kooli , When you read fine print, you would know, the standard model of atom still is a theory. On the other hand, proton/neutron, electron in atom is theory over standard model theory. Which it means science never been observed anything inside of atom, including proton, electron..etc.

How could measure something that never been observed to this date.

Read this article, may help you.

Article Intelligent Atom

Juan Weisz,

Javad Fardaei,

Many thanks for the documentation and explanations. But, Juan Weisz, the mass of electrons can also be calculated. But this requires new fundamental physics beyond current fundamental physics. If you want it, the new fundamental physics should emerge from an ultimate theory. In my opinion, ultimate physics should have theoretical constants whose values should be determined theoretically using cosmological parameters and cosmological constants. No need for laboratories! There we find Planck's units, the formulas of special relativity, Hubble constant, and Einstein's formulas relating to cosmology, etc. But all the formulas are developed so that they are linked to each other by some things which are not yet known in current physics, if you like it's a bit like "fundamental EXOTIC physics".