e=mc2: 103 years later, Einstein's proven right, page 1

PARIS (AFP) – It's taken more than a century, but Einstein's celebrated formula e=mc2 has finally been corroborated, thanks to a heroic computational effort by French, German and Hungarian physicists.

news.yahoo.com...

Here is another example that science can't rest until it finds a confirmation of an abstract idea that sets down certain relationships, even if it takes a non-physical corroboration, such as employing the brute computational power and the knowledge of how things work under the hood.

The issue concerning the famous, short equation was this:

According to the conventional model of particle physics, protons and neutrons comprise smaller particles known as quarks, which in turn are bound by gluons.
The odd thing is this: the mass of gluons is zero and the mass of quarks is only five percent. Where, therefore, is the missing 95 percent?

In Einstein's time, there were no gluons and quarks to stain the impeccable formula with, but later questions were asked. Was Albert Einstein right and wrong at the same time?

After 103 years, due to the ever-increasing computational power, it turned out that Albert Einstein was right and right at the same time.

The answer, according to the study published in the US journal Science on Thursday, comes from the energy from the movements and interactions of quarks and gluons. In other words, energy and mass are equivalent, as Einstein proposed in his Special Theory of Relativity in 1905.

We can only hope that the guys know what they are talking about . . .

There is a simple model that generalizes the issue: In 1905, the formula that relates energy to mass and speed of light looked like this:

E = mc^2

After the discovery of other particles that make protons, it turned out that quarks and gluons cannot account by themselves for the mass of protons -- there had to be something that accounted for the difference. The interactive energy of quarks and gluons was the prime suspect, but there had to be some evidence of that happening. The inquiry added a question mark to the original equation. What if Einstein's equation couldn't account for everything going on in the world of subatomic particles?

?_______E = mc^2

It turned out that it wasn't not that easy to take on Albert Einstein's wisdom, even with the help of an army of computers.



Any message for the challengers, Herr Professor?

_________E





Aaah, let me see . . . (SCIENC)E?
No?

reply to post by stander

---

Was Albert Einstein right and wrong at the same time?

Well that's the nature of quantum physics for ya.

Einstein was right and right at the same time.

You mean right and wrong at the same time?

Originally posted by Good Wolf
reply to post by stander

---

Was Albert Einstein right and wrong at the same time?

Well that's the nature of quantum physics for ya.

Einstein was right and right at the same time.

You mean right and wrong at the same time?

I actually meant right in his time and possibly wrong until their time -- the Year of Our Lord 2008.

reply to post by RFBurns

---

...if all these mathematical magicians can prove Einstein to be correct, then why cant they come up with a more MODERN way to power our world beyond oil eh?

I think that the simple answer is "money". Technology took great leaps and bounds during WWI, WWII and during the Cold War. During times of relative peace and contained engagements such as the Gulf War, the over-riding factor is still one of "finance" since such events do not place the economies on the total-war footing required for massive technical innovation.

There is still too much power and money centred upon oil so other energy streams will remain latent until such time as necessity really kicks in. If or when the oil starts to run dry, the political implications of this will be enormous, effectively wiping out the influence of oil producing nations who have no other major form of income.

reply to post by g210b

---

The whole effort is under development; the final chapter of The Book of Descriptive Quantum Physics may be two thousand pages away.

The great thing about the corroboration is the way it was achieved. Computer modeling in this field is a nightmare: there is not yet enough computing power and lots of clever things had to be thought up to accomplish the task. Computer modeling is the only way to gain further insight into the works, because particle smashing has its limits. It is like hitting a peanut with a hammer and hope that the peanut would break into all atoms that is made of.

Also, you can mathematically manipulate the conditions and the computer model returns particles that don't really exist. But their properties could turn amazing. Someone would surely like them to be for real, which could lead to two kind of ping-pong balls: one that falls to the ground and the other that stays suspended in the air.

The secrets hidden in the pyramids. A real eye opener!
  Posted 5 days ago with 184 member flags

The mystery of 100+ mpg cars, and the disappearance & deaths of men behind it
  Posted 14 days ago with 106 member flags

Scientists able to talk to and teach dolphins sentences - Dolphins share a universal language.
  Posted 12 days ago with 93 member flags

6 Real People With Mind-Blowing Mutant Superpowers
  Posted 4 days ago with 90 member flags

Pirate Bay to Allow Real-Object Downloads. The Real Reason for SOPA, IMO.
  Posted 14 days ago with 74 member flags

a drop of water orbiting a nitting needle in space
  Posted 4 days ago with 69 member flags

Top 10 Most Incredible Pieces Of Nanoscale Art
  Posted 9 days ago with 43 member flags

cold plasma found above earth raises questions of einstiens "gravity is a fundimental force"
  Posted 17 days ago with 25 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: