OT - matter to energy conversion

["Dave Davidson" <davetex99@hotmail.com>]

Hold on, you're comparing apples and oranges.  Dynamite, gunpowder, 
gasoline, etc. do NOT convert matter to energy.  They simply release energy 
from a chemical reaction.  Nuclear fission and fusion actually convert 
matter into energy - and you do get an enormous amount of energy from a 
small amount of matter.  If you can handle the math, a good advanced college 
physics text book can explain it all (it's been a l-o-n-g time ago for me 
and I'm not sure how much I understood at the time).  But you can follow the 
entire derivation of the formulas yourself - it's no secret.

Einstein's theory's have been pretty much proven out experimentally, at 
least as best as the scientists can measure.  They certainly account for 
what we can currently observe.  Too bad Stephen Hawking isn't on this list.  
;)

Dave Davidson
Laurel, Maryland
1993 Dodge TEVan



>From: "Peter VanDerWal" <peterv@peoplepc.com>
>Reply-To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
>To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
>Subject: Re: EV digest 1938
>Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2002 19:33:51 -0700
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Received: from [130.65.3.19] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id 
>MHotMailBE6FC83000A740042A128241031371C30; Sat, 30 Mar 2002 19:06:25 -0800
>Received: from listproc (localhost [127.0.0.1])by hera.sjsu.edu 
>(8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id g2V2Zuv29769;Sat, 30 Mar 2002 18:35:56 -0800 
>(PST)
>Received: from pollux.sjsu.edu (pollux.sjsu.edu [130.65.7.16])by 
>hera.sjsu.edu (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g2V2Zhv29751for 
><ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>; Sat, 30 Mar 2002 18:35:44 -0800 (PST)
>Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h001.c002.snv.cp.net 
>[209.228.32.165])by pollux.sjsu.edu (8.12.1/8.12.1) with SMTP id 
>g2V2ZaGQ024539for <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>; Sat, 30 Mar 2002 18:35:37 -0800 
>(PST)
>Received: (cpmta 17357 invoked from network); 30 Mar 2002 18:35:30 -0800
>Received: from 216.58.151.43 (HELO Peter)  by smtp.peoplepc.com 
>(209.228.32.165) with SMTP; 30 Mar 2002 18:35:30 -0800
>From owner-ev@listproc.sjsu.edu Sat, 30 Mar 2002 19:07:26 -0800
>X-Sent: 31 Mar 2002 02:35:30 GMT
>Message-ID: <003801c1d85c$7efd39c0$0a00000a@vanderwalclan.com>
>References: <200203300555.g2U5t8v17858@hera.sjsu.edu> 
><3CA56F4A.5090800@cabletv.on.ca>
>X-Priority: 3
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
>Sender: owner-ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
>X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.2.09/990901/11:28 -- ListProc(tm) by CREN
>
> > 4.    E=m * C ^2 works just fine.  Ask any nuclear bomb.  The units of
> > energy are kg* m^2  / s^2 so there are no left over units.
> >
>
>Uh huh, please explain how many watts of energy you get from one gram of
>matter.  And you are not allowed to use any energy unit that is defined (in
>anyway) as being equal to 'X' number of grams converted to energy.
>
>P.S. The fact that nuclear bombs work does NOT prove E=MC^2, dynamite, 
>black
>power, flour, etc explodes too and it didn't take a physicist to make or
>discover them.
>
>My Point is not whether matter can be converted to energy, but with the
>formula it self.  Why 'C'?  Why not the rate of expansion of the universe?
>Or the orbital speed of the milkyway?
>
>P.P.S.  What if Mass is a dimension?
>




_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com