E=MC2...isn't that a paradox?

[christo4_99]

If energy is the expression of matter and vice versa...isn't it safe to assume the there was never a time when nothing existed?or maybe time and nothing are just imaginary constructs.perhaps the truth lies in the fact that we are limited in our comprehension in such a way that whatever we can conceive is a mere glimpse of a reality that is infinite...somewhat like our individual lives are finite.he who can think of the infinite and eventual will surely see more than a beginning or an end.so there is no all inclusive beginning or end...only human beings catching glimpses of what is,at any given moment pieces of the infinite cycle of all.

[Pirate88179]

Interesting thoughts.  I have always considered the possibility that time always was, is, and always will be.  I think, like you mentioned, that maybe we as mankind assign the limits of beginning and end and cannot comprehend intellectually any other possibility?

Lots of things in nature are cyclical with both a beginning and an end to the cycle but maybe not to the entire process of cycles?

Maybe think of it as Mc squared =E?

Again, interesting thought process.

Bill

[sm0ky2]

I prefer to think of it in terms of:

E/M = C^2

Which is a paradox, in that it contradicts the theory from which it was derrived, by postulating that exponential acceleration is possible, in multiples of C, as a function of mass,
by converting mass directly into energy.

This also presents itself as one of the fundamental constants of the universe :  89875517873681764  (Kg*m)/(Kg * s^2)

which is the proportional relationship between the energy of any mass, and its.. mass

This is why something the size of your fist can cause a nuclear explosion, or provide power to an entire city.

The paradox lies in the longitudinal translation of the photon.
it never propegates forward, faster than C
Although, a photon of ANY amplitude, is physically moving faster than C, when you include its verticle and horizontal path of travel. And yes sorry Einstein, this is relative to US, the observer.

How much faster than light? that depends directly on the photons "mass". And the mass of a photon can be derrived
from its momentum, as a function of Energy.

Force = E / C
M = F / C

now that you know the energy, and the mass
solve for C, and substitute in your values, to determine the "true velocity" of a particular photon.

Relative Velocity only accounts for the speed it travels from point A to point B, it doesnt take into account the travel between the peaks and troughs of its waves.
the higher the amplitude and frequency, the faster the photon is moving.
Which doesnt fit well into the whole "relativity" thing.
This is why physics ignores all data and experimental results, and blatently proclaims that a photon "has no mass".
For if it has mass, then the primordial assumptions of both general relativity, and special relativity go right out the window.