What is E=mc square? I want to know how Einstein got to that conclusion.?
154756
It essentially means that mass and energy are really the same thing. The true energy of an object is its mass times the speed of light squared.\n\nYes it's still considered valid...and always will be.\n\nYou can read more about it here:\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E%3Dmc%C2%B2
1130053
As mentioned in other replies, physicists don't yet have all of the "how" questions answered. Einstein, in the General Theory of Relativity, pretty much nailed the underpinnings of the current theoretical understanding of gravity. Here is my attempt at the "nutshell." I'll start with an analogy. Let's say you are driving somewhere in the midwest or plains states--essentially flat ground, with a few rolling hills. Let's say you stop your car at the top of a slight rise. As you look around you, you see flat land in every direction. You're sitting on essentially a two-dimensional plane. Taking your foot off the brake, you notice the car starting to roll forward. Your initial observation about the 2-dimensional "space" you were sitting on isn't quite accurate. The 3rd dimension (altitude) has come into play, and gravity is pulling your car into the swale. What Einstein said (and how he came up with this back in the early 1900's is incredible) was that our THREE dimensions are really a slightly inaccurate description of the world (and universe) we inhabit. A fourth dimension, time, is part of the "fabric" of our surroundings. As in the case of that slight "warp" in the 2-dimensional farmland that led to a noticeable effect on your car, Einstein said that warps in the space-time continuum are experienced as gravity. As you know, Einstein was into the "energy = mass" thing big time, and you know that mass is tied up with gravity as well. If you want to get more cozy with these related concepts, I strongly recommend David Bodanis' book, "E=mc2: A Biography of the World's Most Famous Equation" -- available as a "BooksOnTape." It's exciting, full of cool anecdotes about the heroes of 20th century physics, and... NO MATH, just concepts. Best of luck!
103563
Curiouscat is way kewl.....good answer on her part.\n\nE = mc^2 has been proven valid over and over again. Altho, in science, everything is theory, because someone may come along and find a flaw or correction.\n\nHowever up the present, this equation is rock solid.
866589
The formula expanded a bit is: E (joules or kg*m²/s²) = m (kilograms) multiplied by (299,792,458 m/s)2\n\nE is Energy, m is mass and c is the speed of light in a vacuum.  \n\nCheck out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E%3Dmc%C2%B2\n\nOff the subject, but an important reply to Fresh Prince and those of the same mind:\n\nYou seem pretty mad.  It is unfortunate that "[we] people disgust [you]."  It does not diminish Einstein’s discovery to say God created the highly balanced universe which is made up of this mathematic formula as well as all formulas - discovered and undiscovered.  Einstein was doing wonderful work in unlocking the mysteries of Creation - he was a genius among geniuses\n\nEinstein himself believed in a "god / creator" - not the God of the Bible, but a Creator nonetheless.  He was not closed - he acknowledged that the universe is so finely balanced on finite mathematical principals, there is a higher intelligence governing things that we cannot comprehend.  He spent his life exploring the wonder of what has been created and set before mankind.  Please cast aside your disgust.  No one is taking credit away from Einstein - or you.  \n\nRegarding religion, Einstein said: "The most beautiful and deepest experience a man can have is the sense of the mysterious. It is the underlying principle of religion as well as all serious endeavor in art and science. He who never had this experience seems to me, if not dead, then at least blind. To sense that behind anything that can be experienced there is something that our mind cannot grasp and whose beauty and sublimity reaches us only indirectly and as a feeble reflection, this is religiousness. In this sense I am religious. To me it suffices to wonder at these secrets and to attempt humbly to grasp with my mind a mere image of the lofty structure of all that is there."\n\nWhen asked: "[Do] You accept the historical Jesus?" \n\nHe replied: "Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life."\n\nNo, Einstein did not believe in God as Christians believe.  But he recognized the order of the universe as a signpost to a higher being.  The point is, there is no cause to be "disgusted" by ideas outside your paradigm.  I am not disgusted with you.\n\nTake a hint from Einstein - the consummate scientist who believed in a Creator: "...science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."  I will not be blind, so please do not be the former.  Take a look from another perspective; you may learn something of value.\n\nRemember, you may be angry with God, deny God, ignore God, and not care to inquire with an open mind, but God loves you anyway.\n\nHave a blessed day, my friend (that is a positive statement, please take it as such).
853466
Equivalence.\n\nPhysics had long treated many things of being of entirely different natures.  Matter was concrete.  Absolute.  It followed laws of motion and the like.  Energy, on the other hand, was ethereal, zinging around and through the matter.  It is not ridiculous that physicists had thought this way - this is much of our experience of the physical world.\n\nE=mc^2, however, suggests that this is just not so.\n\nLiterally, it states that matter -IS- energy.  And conversely that energy is matter.  There is no 'special' status for one or the other.  Baseballs have a wavelength like any chunk of energy, and energy must occur in packets like any chunk of mass.  While quite simple in its statement, it is pretty staggering in its implication.\n\nFor example, it is used to explain how stars run (fusion turns minute amounts of mass into energy), explain the expansion of the universe (free energy turns into particle pairs which exert an outward pressure on space itself), and why photons which have no rest mass, can nonetheless push things around with impact (their speed and energy GIVE them mass).\n\nIf you want to use the equation itself, make sure your units match up.  If you use kilograms for mass and measure the speed of light in metres per second, energy will be in joules.  Hope that helps!
1168590
Let's look at E = mc^2.\n\nE is energy. It is measured in joules.\nm is mass. It is measured in kilograms.\nc is the speed of light. It is measured in meters per second.\n\nKilograms multiplied by (meters per second)squared are joules. If you don't have a mass multiplied by the square of a velocity (or something with equivalent units), you don't have energy.\n\nThe maximum speed any mass can have is infinitesimally less than the speed of light. c^2 would be the square of that speed.\n\nNow, let's consider the practicalities. Experimentally, we find that, as we accelerate something very close to the speed of light (which is done every day in particle accelerators, for example), it becomes harder and harder to accelerate the closer it gets to the speed of light. E = mc^2 is the energy of a mass at rest; this is where the energy of nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants comes from. As an object moves, its energy is multiplied by a factor usually abbreviated with the Greek letter gamma; its value is:\n\ngamma = 1/[1 - (v/c)^2]^1/2\n\nSo it's 1 over the square root of [1 minus (v/c)squared].\n\nAs v becomes closer and closer to the speed of light, v/c becomes closer and closer to 1, the denominator of the fraction becomes closer and closer to zero, and gamma becomes larger and larger. If v were to equal c, gamma would be infinite. This is why you can't accelerate any massive object to the speed of light - it would take an infinite amount of energy. \n\nSo, you may ask, what about photons? They go at the speed of light, don't they? Indeed they do. They manage this because their mass is zero, and they can never travel at any speed other than the speed of light.\n\nIncidentally, it is indeed true that m = E/c^2; this is often useful in physics calculations.
471151
another one of einstein's equations is as follows:\nrelative mass = original mass divided by the square-root of "1-(velocity squared/speed of light squared)"\n\nyou can better picture the equation by going here:\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass-energy#Relativistic_mass\n\nexplained:\nas the object's velocity squared approached the same value of the speed of light squared, the phrase "v2-c2" would approach '1'. causing the entire bottom mathematical phrase to approach '0' because 1-1=0 :) \nas the bottom phrase approaches '0' the relative mass becomes almost infinite because anything divided by something so close to zero would experience a massive increase in value. example: 1/.01=100.  as .01 becomes smaller (approaches zero), the '100'(our hypothetical relative mass) goes -way- up (approaches infinity). \n\nremember that mathematics does not allow division by zero therefore anything having mass cannot attain the speed of light. because the energy required to accelerate near-infinite mass would itself be near infinite.
8298
In the formula, E stands for energy, m stands for mass, and c-squared is a constant factor equal to the speed of light squared. The formula indicates that large quantities of energy can result from tiny amounts of mass if the mass is completely changed into energy. Developed by Einstein.
418356
If you want somebody to explain the entire theory of relativity....then that will take a while.  For the basic E=mc^2, where E=energy, m=mass, and c=speed of light (3x10^8 m/s), then in simple terms it means that a small amount of mass can give off large amounts of energy.  Another way of seeing it is by saying that mass is simply highly compressed (or smashed together) amounts of energy.
618887
By relativity, E = Mc2\n\nIf E = 4 X 10^6 J, then....\n\n4 X 10^6 / c^2 = 4.45 X 10^ -11 kg\n\nWhere C = 299,792,458 m/s
114259
In short, yes. But E=mc^2, is so much deeper than chemical reactions. Actually, it relates mass to energy. It lead to the concept of nuclear fission. It says that if you have a small amount mass, say 30 AMUs, and you multiply that by the speed of light squared, you will get a TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF ENERGY. It was derived in Einstein's paper on relativity in 1905.
690012
the equation is as simple as the elegant and simple universe.the equation means that any type of energy can be converted into mass and vice versa. it means that at speed of light the enrgy becomes infinite(to accelerate it actually)and thus mass becomes infinite(special relativity)provided the generation of light in both the cases. the actual equation is e(kinetic energy)=mc^2/underroot(1-v^2/c^2).the e=mc^2 equation is still applicable for objects moving or stationary meaning that both the equations are true.
954813
Yeah, it's E=mc^2 and it relates energy and mass.  E is energy, m is mass, c is the speed of light (celeritas).  The equation could come useful in physics, like atomic physics.\n\nWhat did you wanted to know?
1143118
Einstein theorized that energy and matter are interchangeable. He postulated that nuclear fission takes place via chain-reaction and the energy (measured in ergs) produced from the "splitting of atoms" is equal to the atomic mass of an element multiplied by the speed off light squared (mc2). Einstein wasn't thinking of creating a "bomb" when he first developed the theory. Other nuclear physicist came up with the bomb idea. That is why the isotope of the heaviest element (uranium) was used to make an atomic bomb. Also, a small amount of matter is capable of producing a tremendous amount of energy. The testing of the atomic bomb actually proved Einstein's E=mc2 theory.
545787
E = mC^2. Therefore, Energy
680487
Although I love Einstein, E-mc2 is only a THEORY.  I think you need to look back to the creationism THEORIES of the Big Bang, Quantum theory, Universal theory, String theory.  Engery is neither created or destroyed.  We get engery to use because of lost energy in other reactions.  Combustion has a lot of energy in the form of heat and light. etc....
401395
Way to go Arbitrage!  Oh to funny guy- yeah we get that E=MC2  IS a formula- but if you really want to "get it" Check out Maxwells equations. It's a great time to be a science nerd with all this info pouring in now! Figure it out & go up one on Albert!