jeheron Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 Why, when calculating values with this equation do we use the speed of light. And why do we use the value: 300000 and not the speed of light in meters per seconds or cms per second? There may be an obvious answer, but I can find it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mezarashi Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 Your first question would be like asking, why is the equation E = mc^2 true. I certainly don't know. As for the units, it's an arbitrary matter. If you want your energy in Joules, then use c= 3e8 m/s, or if you want them in microJoules etc. If you start using non-SI units you will not get Joules however. I don't have such a chart. Analyzing the units: mc^2 = kg m^2/s^2 = Joules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 Why, when calculating values with this equation do we use the speed of light. And why do we use the value: 300000 and not the speed of light in meters per seconds or cms per second? You can use 1.8026175 x 1012 furlongs / fortnight for the speed of light if you want, and put in the mass in stones, and it will spit out the energy in terms of stone x furlong2/fortnight2. However, that's not a particularly useful relation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeheron Posted October 8, 2005 Author Share Posted October 8, 2005 You can use 1.8026175 x 1012 furlongs / fortnight for the speed of light if you want, and put in the mass in stones, and it will spit out the energy in terms of stone x furlong2/fortnight2[/sup']. However, that's not a particularly useful relation. Its so reassuring to know that I can calculate amounts of energy in terms of stones and furlongs. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 You can use 1.8026175 x 1012 furlongs / fortnight for the speed of light if you want, and put in the mass in stones, and it will spit out the energy in terms of stone x furlong2/fortnight2[/sup']. However, that's not a particularly useful relation. Stone is a unit of weight, not mass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 Stone is a unit of weight, not mass. I was having trouble finding an exotic Imperial unit of mass, heh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Severian Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 E=mc2 is also just a unit thing. I usually use units where E=m. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now