Also,

E = hf

so, hf = mc2

which gives an expression for mass as hf/c^2

... a product of frequency, wavelength and the speed of light! No particles!

Any theory or law or equation that uses speed of light as a constant is not correct because speed of light is not constant, speed of light is slowing down.

edit on 28-12-2011 by mwuhi because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by Glargod

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
I don't want to be a killjoy. but this is a science forum, where is the science that shows this soul/spirit energy exists? As it is this looks like a ripe candidate for the philosophy forum. Oh and to answer there is no signifigance. Einsteins equation works as written, meaning your equation does not work, unless you prove it does.

I thought scientists were opened minded.

I thought science was about new discoveries

In your case, I guess that I must make an exclusion to my belief

Scientists are open minded, and science is about new discoveries. New discoveries aren't beliefs but intelligently analyzed intellectual constructs backed by reams of repeatable empirical evidence and rigorous precision in language and definitions.

Scientists are not open-minded about accepting unjustified and fuzzy beliefs as a discovery, and that is a good idea.

Originally posted by chocise
Also,

E = hf

so, hf = mc2

which gives an expression for mass as hf/c^2

... a product of frequency, wavelength and the speed of light! No particles!

This is wrong, because there's a difference between understanding physics and superficial manipulation and equating two quantities only because they have the same units.

The statement E=hf is about the energy of a single photon, intrinsically quantized, because there is Planck's constant in there. E=mc^2 is about the energy equivalent assigned to the rest mass of a particle. Photons have zero rest mass. More generally E^2=p^2*c^2 + m^2 c^4, and this works even with electromagnetic waves (with no rest mass) because (even classically) they do have momentum without rest mass.

Therefore for a photon, where E=h*f you can then take E=p*c (as m=0) and get p = h*f/c.

Now this is interesting, as it means that per photon, the higher frequency the more momentum it has. Roughly it leads one to understand why X-rays and gamma rays are damaging to the molecules making up humans, and lower frequency E&M radiation is much less damaging: high frequency photons have enough energy & momentum to knock out individual electrons from atoms and cause substantial chemical changes as a result.

Actually everyone here is missing something quite important.


E = mc^2 is the rest energy of the mass in question.

The actual equation for the energy is E = ymc^2 where y (gamma) = 1 / sqrt(1 - (v/c)^2) which implies that as the velocity v approaches the speed of light c, then (v/c)^2 = 1 and then y = 1 / sqrt(1-1) = 1/0 which then leads us to 2 possible interpretations:

1: It is impossible to divide by zero so you can take this to mean that anything with mass cannot travel at the speed of light.

2: Anything divided by zero is actually equal to infinity so perhaps when a mass approaches the speed of light the energy becomes infinite.


I would have to say that such infinite energy as explained in 2 could even be what the OP is referring to spirit energy or source energy (infinite energy = spirit energy/ source energy)

Originally posted by mbkennel

Originally posted by chocise
Also,

E = hf

so, hf = mc2

which gives an expression for mass as hf/c^2

... a product of frequency, wavelength and the speed of light! No particles!

This is wrong, because there's a difference between understanding physics and superficial manipulation and equating two quantities only because they have the same units.

The statement E=hf is about the energy of a single photon, intrinsically quantized, because there is Planck's constant in there. E=mc^2 is about the energy equivalent assigned to the rest mass of a particle. Photons have zero rest mass. More generally E^2=p^2*c^2 + m^2 c^4, and this works even with electromagnetic waves (with no rest mass) because (even classically) they do have momentum without rest mass.

Therefore for a photon, where E=h*f you can then take E=p*c (as m=0) and get p = h*f/c.

Now this is interesting, as it means that per photon, the higher frequency the more momentum it has. Roughly it leads one to understand why X-rays and gamma rays are damaging to the molecules making up humans, and lower frequency E&M radiation is much less damaging: high frequency photons have enough energy & momentum to knock out individual electrons from atoms and cause substantial chemical changes as a result.

Thank you, I was hoping someone would be along to clear that up!

But... Photons have zero rest mass is a bit of an enigma isn't it? Do you ever get a photon at rest? And if it does have mass when not at rest, how can it possibly travel at the speed of light?

Also ... Roughly it leads one to understand why X-rays and gamma rays are damaging to the molecules making up humans, and lower frequency E&M radiation is much less damaging: high frequency photons have enough energy & momentum to knock out individual electrons from atoms and cause substantial chemical changes as a result.
X-rays & gamma rays are damaging precisely because they have more energy btw, which is given by their frequency in the E = hf equation, not because they have more momentum!*... which is a product of mass. It would be easy to knock you with a comment like "there's a difference between understanding physics and superficial manipulation", but it's still the holiday season so I'll pass on such glib remarks.

There is no end to speed, just as you can add one number to another, and so on. I have my own theory which has been advanced recently while working with electromagnetism. The conflict between gravity and electromagnetism. I believe the universe is almost entirely electric in nature. While considering magnets for instance, they seem to have a uniform basic pattern. A force runs through them. To like poles will repel and to opposites will attract. As I considered this I compared it to gravity which inter-reacts with all mass, drawing it in. Then it hit me. Both the magnet and gravity draw in, but to have an equality, something must flow back out at the same time. therefore I believed that a magnet and gravity from some large body both do the same thing in that force draws in and flows out at the same time. I used the sun as my example. The larger the body the more the gravity and thus the outflow. So the sun's gravity pulls inward, yet light flows outward. So just as magnets work to influence electrons, so too the sun works to influence another part of atomic or even quantum substance. And that substance is in everything. The two can't be the same because the earth has both an electromagnetic field, and gravity. A magnet can draw steel or Iron but not effect other materials. Gravity can effect all materials including the magnets. In the end I guess that some tiny particle related to all things does this, maybe something like an opposite neutrino particle.

Because of this I believe that faster than light speed is possible because that tiny "other particle" permeates all things. Of course, I can't prove it, yet.

Originally posted by Fromabove
Both the magnet and gravity draw in, but to have an equality, something must flow back out at the same time.

edit on 3-3-2012 by Fromabove because: (no reason given)

I say again, no genius am I, but I like how you can explain things so that even I understand what you're saying. Good job!

And, with this simple mind I have to ask, when you say that something must flow back out, do you mean flow out and away from (say,) earth? Also, if this something has been flowing out for 4.5 billion years, would it have been utterly depleted by now?