Is E=mc*2 valid for antimatter ?
480431
Yes. Part of the idea of antimatter is in some equations containing squares, to solve for that variable you must have a positive and negative answer. Therefore an opposite or anti- thing must exist. Antimatter in this case. So if the E=mc^2 works for matter than it should work for anti-matter.\n\nHowever, as the theory of antimatter states - rather than be like matter where something travelling the speed of light can produce matter and mass, the antimatter will become energy and destroy mass when it comes in contact with matter. \n\nHope that makes some sense. Antimatter is an annoying thing.
8321
The theoretical physics equation E = mc2 states a relationship between energy (E) and mass (m) first formulated by Albert Einstein in his 1905 paper "Ist die Trägheit eines Körpers von seinem Energieinhalt abhängig?" ("Does the Inertia of a Body Depend Upon Its Energy Content?", published in Annalen der Physik on September 27), one of the articles now known as his Annus Mirabilis Papers.
682752
In short, No. E=MC2 is Einsteins formula for explaining the rest energy of a body. Basically how much energy any object contains bundled within its atoms. He created this at the beginning of the 1900's. The first electrical devices were springing up in the 1600's - 1700's.
9631
I suppose you are referring to galaxies composed entirely or at least mostly of antimatter. None have been observed. If there were any, it would certainly be coming into contact with large amounts of matter at some sort of boundary. At that point, the collisions of the two would set off gigantic amounts of gamma rays, which we would be able to see. These have not, however, been observed. This is likely due to the fact that, for some reason as yet unknown, the amount of matter has increased hugely in the universe relative to antimatter since the big bang.
195947
In Einstein's equation E=mc^2, E stands for energy, m is mass, and c is the speed of light. This theory of relativity helps to explain how we get energy from nuclear reactions, as the mass of atoms and particles themselves are converted into energy.
647158
no.  The most anti-matter they can produce at one time is incredibly small, only a few particles the size of electrons.
339718
Physicists say they have mass produced antimatter, a crucial first step towards precision studies of its properties that may help solve one of the greatest mysteries of the Universe. \n\nAntihydrogen has been made before, but only a few atoms at a time. \n\nNow, the Cern particle accelerator in Geneva, Switzerland, has produced more than 50,000. \n\nAntimatter is the mirror image of ordinary matter and both should have been created in equal quantities at the birth of the Universe. That everything around is predominantly ordinary matter is therefore a major puzzle. \n\nCern is the European Organisation for Nuclear Research. \n\nIn the latest experiment, researchers used the Cern accelerator to create antiprotons and trapped them in a vacuum chamber. \n\nA radioactive source, meanwhile, was used to create positrons, which were held in a separate trap. The antiprotons were then fed into the pool of positrons, where the two combined to form antihydrogen. \n\nThe antimatter was short-lived being destroyed when it bumped into normal matter. Detectors picked up the unique radiation signatures of antimatter as it was annihilated. \n\nAlso see the Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter#Antimatter_production
791590
E = m x c^2,\nso \n\nmass = Energy / c^2 (speed of light squared)
374022
There are already antimatters existing in and outside our galaxy. But the ratio of antimatter to matter is rather small. More often than not, when both matter and antimatter come together, large amount of energy is release. The energy emitted is large enough to create another particle.
941720
Doesn't that have something to do with Einstein's e=mc^2?  It sure looks like it.  The rest of seems to be an example of an explanation of the inefficiency of practical mass to energy conversions.  I could be wrong.\n\nOh, by the way:  what are you asking?
912086
(m)\n\nMatter which consists of antiparticles, elementary particles of ordinary matter, such as protons and electrons, but have an opposite electrical charge. For example, an antiproton has a negative charge while a proton has a positive charge. When a particle of matter and a particle of antimatter come into contact with each other they are destroyed, releasing energy.
738074
If you had the antimatter and could control it, yes any energy releasinig reaction could power a vehicle.  Antimatter exists, but not in any useful quantities in nature.  Most of what we know of antimatter is from studying the tiny (and by tiny I mean nanograms) amounts we've made in various particle accelerators.  You would also need to overcome the storage implications - seeing as matter and antimatter annihilate upon contact releasing energy, the antimatter could never touch its containment unit.  This is usually done by keeping the antimatter in a helix unit stored as close to 0 K as possible, in a very powerful magnetic field to keep it in the center of the unit.  \n\nThe other implications you would have to overcome is to harness the energy it released for practical application.  When matter and antimatter annihilate they release a gamma wave, which will pass through most materials without even interacting with them.  You would need to capture this, and convert it to heat, and from there you could convert the heat to mechanical motion.  \n\nIf it were a spacecraft and you didnt need to worry about the radiation left behind, you could use the energy produced to accelerate particles which would act as your thrust (similar to an ion drive).
635609
E=MC2 describes the potential energy in all matter. Since C is the speed of light, and C squared is a HUGE number, there is lots of potential energy stored in all matter.\n\nThere isn't really a practical application unless you're building an atom bomb or a time machine.
249306
Ask Einstein, the famous E=mc2 formula directly relates to your question.
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!
339047
It is just a reference to E=mc^2.  It can be through fission or fusion, so yes you are surely correct.
85426
nothing what's the antimatter with you! seriously though if you mean antimatter, it's a form of matter in which most of it's properties are reversed.