E=Mc2 Paradox?

[StupidAndy]

so i posted this in the "you know your a nerd when" forum game, but i want a solid answer, so whats the simplest answer? google it? NO! its wait 12 hours until someone has the idea to post on this thread!

so heres the paradox

E=Mc2

E=energy

==equal, so same

M= matter

C= constant, so speed of light, its consistent, except with the warp drive apparently

2=twice, so multiplied by two

so energy is matter twice the speed of light. right? wrong.

this is the paradox

!PARADOX WARNING!

if you don't want your mind blown, do not continue reading

!PARADOX WARNING!
light is energy, so it should follow the same rules, so its twice the speed of light, but that can't happen, because its the speed of light, and it is the constant, so it can't go any faster, so how is there energy? the light should keep going twice the speed of light, making a endless spiral downwards, making the speed of light, constantly going faster, making it inconsistent, so you could technically see across the universe in 0.00000001 milliseconds, its a paradox.

and thats just energy, lets go for something like heat.

so heat, its hot, and lack of it is cold, and its energy, so E=Mc2 right? no. nothing can go faster then the speed of light, so it shouldn't exist, so there shouldn't be any energy in the universe, so no light, no heat, no magnetism, no electricity, though i may be wrong, but isn't that just electrons? so there should just be matter, not energy

im not taking dark matter and energy into consideration yet, because, nobody knows what it is or does.

am i being smart for a pre-high schooler? or just a ignorant idiot?

[Gaarst]

E = mc²

[Dman979]

Yeah, like Gaarst said, you've got the equation wrong.

Try E=mc^2 if your superscript is broken.

[tater]

c², not 2c.

[Snark]

Aside from the mistake with the formula, you're misinterpreting its meaning.

All it's saying is that mass and energy are equivalent, and that the mathematical conversion between the two is the square of the speed of light.

Thus, for example, if you want to know the mass of a photon, just take its energy and divide by c-squared.

[Jonfliesgoats]

What the other guys said is right.  Also, loud mistakes erase quiet ignorance in one, some or all of us.  Keep screaming ideas!

[kerbiloid]

If take 150 000 km/s as measurement unit, then c = 2 and c² = 2c.
That's what they call maths.

Edited December 3, 2016 by kerbiloid

[Gaarst]

42 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

If take 150 000 km/s as measurement unit, then c = 2 and c² = 2c.
That's what they call maths.

Yeah, and physics says that's wrong. c is a speed, a speed can't equal the square of a speed (it's like saying a mass equals a length).

When taking the square of c, you also have to take the square of the unit or conversion factor, so c²=2c is wrong. c² = (2*(150000 km/s)) * c would be correct.

[Vanamonde]

Kinetic energy is the mass times the velocity squared. That doesn't mean anything in the system being examined moves at the velocity squared, or twice the velocity, or anything of that sort. The velocity is just a term which comes up twice in the math. 

What I've always wondered is, does Einstein's equation merely represent the maximal case of the kinetic energy equation? Since the speed of light is as fast as anything can go, nothing could have more energy than its mass multiplied by the maximum velocity squared. I suspect that's far too simple and I'm mistaken, but what the heck, it doesn't hurt to ask, right? 

[Gaarst]

19 minutes ago, Vanamonde said:

What I've always wondered is, does Einstein's equation merely represent the maximal case of the kinetic energy equation? Since the speed of light is as fast as anything can go, nothing could have more energy than its mass multiplied by the maximum velocity squared. I suspect that's far too simple and I'm mistaken, but what the heck, it doesn't hurt to ask, right? 

E = mc² describes the rest energy. Kinetic energy adds to that, so without relativistic effects, the maximum energy (we don't care about potential here) would be 3/2*mc².

Except that in special relativity, kinetic energy becomes more complicated and includes a factor γ (Lorentz constant) going to infinity as the velocity of the object goes to c which means that the energy of an object with speed c is infinity. The total energy of an object in special relativity is γmc² (the velocity of the object is included in the factor γ).

Edited December 3, 2016 by Gaarst
Typo

[Vanamonde]

Oh, jeez. I even left the 1/2 coefficient out of the kinetic energy equation. Nothing like being publicly stupid to get one's day off to a great start. I knew about it! Honest! 

Thanks, Gaarst. 

[Jonfliesgoats]

I am publicly stupid all the time!  It's fun!  We should eat cake and drink scotch now!

[Wjolcz]

20 hours ago, StupidAndy said:

!PARADOX WARNING!

if you don't want your mind blown, do not continue reading

!PARADOX WARNING!

[GONE VIOLENT](MUST WATCH)

[kerbiloid]

8 hours ago, Gaarst said:

Yeah, and physics says that's wrong. c is a speed, a speed can't equal the square of a speed (it's like saying a mass equals a length).

When taking the square of c, you also have to take the square of the unit or conversion factor, so c²=2c is wrong. c² = (2*(150000 km/s)) * c would be correct.

You could just use a standard notation. Energy  is L²MT^-2.