[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 121 KB, 879x328, Relativity3_Walk_of_Ideas_Berlin.JPG.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8133878 No.8133878 [Reply] [Original]

if mass and energy are the same thing why aren't they expressed in the same units?

>> No.8133883

>>8133878
Because c has units.
They're not the same thing. They're proportional.

>> No.8133888

If temperature is just average kinetic energy, why don't they have the same units?

>> No.8133903

>>8133878
Your premise that mass and energy is the same thing is flawed; If mass and energy was the same, then how would someting massless, like light, have energy?

>> No.8133906

>>8133878
Because units are completely arbitrary. Work in more natural units where c=1.

>> No.8133992

They are equivalent, not equal.

>> No.8134010
File: 843 KB, 1600x1200, 1464157223491.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8134010

They are like 2 currencies that can be exchanged at a cost of c^2 joules per kilo of mass. As they are fundamentally different quantities, they have different units (just like £ $ € ...)

>> No.8134311

>>8133878
Because c ≠ 1 in our shitty SI units of measurement. We Planck when?

>> No.8134670

>>8133903
Cus it's moving dawg

>> No.8134673
File: 4 KB, 251x251, 1310408441466.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8134673

>>8133878
>mass and energy are the same

>> No.8134679

>>8133878
They are, think kinetic energy, J=kg m/s.

>> No.8134722

ElectronVolts (eV) bro

>> No.8134729

>>8133878
>the same thing

They are equivalent but not the same thing. C has units in ms^-1 too.

>> No.8134784

>>8134722
[math]eV/c^2[/math] still...
eV is an expression for energy like J, but scaled differently.

>> No.8134880

>>8134673
They are in the same sense as dollars and euros are the same. They only differ by some exchange factor.

>> No.8135017

>>8134880
Wrong.

>> No.8136981
File: 9 KB, 239x338, 1345561642470.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8136981

>>8133878

>> No.8139122

>>8135017
Excellent argument!

>> No.8139125
File: 148 KB, 410x391, Gurt.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8139125

>>8134673
>he doesn't know matter is just energetic excitations in quantum fields

>> No.8139128

>>8133888
pls answer this

>> No.8139129

>>8139128
[math] K = \exp( k_b T ) [/math] or something

>> No.8139131

>>8133878
It triggers me that the E isn't connected via the middle beam to the top beam of the equal sign.

Either connect both sides of the equations or don't connect either.

>> No.8140449

>>8139128
Temperature and energy, they just have some constant exchange factor, namely k_B, or the Boltzmann constant. They are pretty much equivalent in that sense, different viewpoints of the same phenomenon.

>> No.8140463

>>8139131
Well they needed to connect the equal sign to something, it wasn't going to levitate on its own.
The rest is not connected, except for the 2, which needed to be for the same reason.

>> No.8140470

>>8133903
Only applied to masses at rest.

>> No.8140471

>>8139129
No, that's not true at all.
Exponential functions cannot have units in the argument, first off. Second off, it's linear. W = exp(S/k_b), but T is not exponentially related to KE- it's direct.

>> No.8142066

>>8133878
They are not the same and thus are expressed in different units.

Also you literally just posted the conversion formula