Einstein's formula of Energy is E = mc^2, but c^2 is the speed of light squared, therefore it can be assumed that c^2 can be replaced by s - speed, as nap in the case of thermal Energy. The pattern would be more general and in my opinion more correct.
Piotr,
You would have unbalanced dimensions.
If the have Joules on the left, and a term with mass on the right, you need *something* with units of (length per second) squared.
And it turns out to be c.
Dear James and Piotr,
There are many papers or books which put c=1, that is possible because it is a constant and h or G, but if you do that you need to change the system of units as is done in natural system of units where the most important physical constants are taken as one. Thus the unit of mass is not at all kg as in the MKS.
Hmm… I just want replece c^2 to s in Einstein pattern. Then we could say, that object x got E, y if run with speed z.
Piotr,
You can, but as Daniel points out, you then lose the utility of dimensional stability. Unless you want to measure masses in kg.m^2.s^-2.
Which seems unreasonable.
Momentum scales linearly with speed (for non relativistic speeds) - is that what you're after?
I do not know. Maybe correctly will be E = kg * m/s but kg = e - m/s, then kg = e + slow down, becaouse the body at rest has more mass. You pick up squares because You have an epistemological hurdle resulting from the Einstein formula.
Piotr,
> You pick up squares because You have an epistemological hurdle >resulting from the Einstein formula
No.
You 'pick up squares' because of the act of integrating momentum.
Basic mathematics.
- Badges
- Science topic