I have decided to model my teams after the Monty Python philosopher’s soccer match. So here come the referees, scientists who set up the laws of the game.

**Head Referee: Albert Einstein**

Einstein was a German theoretical physicist, best remembered for his theory of relativity, the photoelectric effectand mass–energy equivalence, (*E* = *mc*^{2)}. He was a 1921 Nobel Prize winner.

Einstein’s many contributions to physics include

- Special theory of relativity, combining classical mechanics and electromagnetistm
- General theory of relativity, a new theory of gravitation which added the principle of equivalence to the principle of relativity, correcting Newton’s equations for large bodies of mass
- Founding of relativistic cosmology with a cosmological constant
- The deflection of light by gravity and gravitational lensing, helping us understand black holes
- An explanation for capillary action
- Proving that light moves as both a wave and particle
- The quantum theory of atomic motion in solids
- Zero point energy
- The semiclassical version of the Schrodinger equation
- Discovering the photoelectric effect, the fact that light can excite electrons, causing them to be emitted from solids, specifically metals
- The quantum theory of a monatomic gas which predicted Bose-Einstein condensation, a new form of matter

**Linesman: Sir Isaac Newton**

Isaac Newton was one of the most influential scientists in all of history. His famous work *Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica*, sets the groundwork for most of classical mechanics. In this book, Newton described the law of universal gravitation and the three laws of motion

In mechanics, Newton also set down the idea that momentum in a closed system is conserved. In addition, he built the first practical reflecting telescope and developed the theory of the visible spectrum of color through experiments with a prism. He is also credited with the law of cooling, a mathematical analysis of the rate of temperature changes.

Finally, Newton was the leader in developing differential and integral calculus.

**Linesman: Antoine-Laurent de Lavoisier **

Antoine-Laurent de Lavoisier was a French scientist who is now credited as the father of modern chemistry. Early in his career he recognized a component of the air and named it. He also “discovered” and named hydrogen gas. Lavoisier is most famous for his law of conservation of mass, which states that the mass of the reactants of a chemical reaction must equal the mass of the products. In addition to this, he helped construct the metric system, write the first extensive list of elements, and helped construct a system of chemical nomenclature and stoichiometry.

http://www.questacon.edu.au/indepth/einstein/science.html, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein, http://www.google.com/archivesearch?hl=en&safe=off&rlz=1T4GGIH_enUS284US284&ei=_Di5SdGzKI6gM4DLvacI&resnum=0&q=isaac+newton’s+achievements&um=1&ie=UTF-8&scoring=t&ei=_ji5Sd_sAZiWMfqCzZcI&sa=X&oi=timeline_result&resnum=11&ct=title, http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/biography/Lavoisier.html

on March 13, 2009 at 4:39 amAnirudh Kumar Satsangikindly let me know that in E=mc2 (famous eqs given by Einstein) whether c2 (c square) stands only for denoting some numerical value in the equation or there is some evidence of a speed equal to the square of speed of light?

on March 13, 2009 at 1:07 pmscienceguy288I am kind of confused about your question. Are you asking what c stands for numerically? If so, it is 3×10^8 m/s

on March 16, 2009 at 12:23 amAnirudh Kumar SatsangiNo, this is not the question. My question is whether in the formula c^2 denotes only numerical value to put in the formula for the purpose of calculation only, or a speed equal to the c^2 is possible?

on March 16, 2009 at 9:22 amscienceguy288Ah, in that case, c, as I stated is a constant representing the speed of light. The number I gave is a rough estimate. 299,792,458 metres per second is the official value. For an ideal vacuum, theory suggests all light travels at the same speed – regardless of the light’s color, brightness, direction, or passage of time. Now, nothing is ideal. Not even space. So there is a bit of error there, but, it is very accurate and will do for most calculations. Now for the question of is it possible. For light, yes, as stated above. For humans, not so much. Because if we travelled at the speed of light, we would be moving back through time slower than normal. See relativity.

on March 17, 2009 at 3:45 amAnirudh Kumar Satsangi(1)Whether E=Mc^2 is for Potential Energy or Kinetic Energy or for some other form of energy? How did this formula arrive at?

(2)It seems that E=Mc^2 does not hold good everywhere.

on March 17, 2009 at 9:55 amscienceguy2881). E is total energy: the sum of kinetic energy and rest energy. In other words, energy equals mass multiplied by the speed of light squared. The formula was derived by Albert Einstein, who arrived at it in 1905 in the paper “Does the inertia of a body depend upon its energy-content?”, one of his Annus Mirabilis (“Miraculous Year”) Papers. It is a consequence of the symmetries of space and time. In the formula, c2 is the conversion factor required to convert from units of mass to units of energy.

2.) Just a few examples:

Any time energy is generated, the process can be evaluated from an E = mc2 perspective. For instance, the “Gadget”-style bomb used in the Trinity test and the bombing of Nagasaki had an explosive yield equivalent to 21 kt of TNT. About 1 kg of the approximately 6.15 kg of plutonium in each of these bombs fissioned into lighter elements totaling almost exactly one gram less, after cooling [The heat, light, and electromagnetic radiation released in this explosion carried the missing one gram of mass. This occurs because nuclear binding energy is released whenever elements with more than 62 nucleons fission.

Another example is hydroelectric generation. The electrical energy produced by Grand Coulee Dam’s turbines every 3.7 hours represents one gram of mass. This mass passes to the electrical devices which are powered by the generators (such as lights in cities), where it appears as a gram of heat and light. Turbine designers look at their equations in terms of pressure, torque, and RPM. However, Einstein’s equations show that all energy has mass, and thus the electrical energy produced by a dam’s generators, and the heat and light which result from it, all retain their mass, which is equivalent to the energy. The potential energy – and equivalent mass – represented by the waters of the Columbia River as it descends to the Pacific Ocean would be converted to heat due to viscous friction and the turbulence of white water rapids and waterfalls were it not for the dam and its generators. This heat would remain as mass on site at the water, were it not for the equipment which converted some of this potential and kinetic energy into electrical energy, which can be moved from place to place (taking mass with it).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass-energy_equivalence#Practical_examples

on March 27, 2009 at 2:07 pmSherryThis is so interesting…

I shall enjoy this too.

Enjoying catching up.

Sherry

on April 16, 2009 at 5:43 amAnirudh Kumar SatsangiWhether Einstein did some empirical work to derive conversion factor c^2 in his formula E=mc^2 or he did it intuitively?

on May 8, 2009 at 12:25 amAnirudh Kumar SatsangiAccording to Einstein Theory of Relativity, E=mc^2. According to this relationship of Energy and Mass

1 kg mass of any matter is equivalent to 9 x 10^16 J of energy.

Does it mean that,

Mass of any matter is Condensed Form of Energy and Energy is Diffused Form of Mass of any matter ?

A question may also arise what existed before the creation of the Universe Energy or Mass ?

on May 26, 2009 at 12:56 amAnirudh Kumar SatsangiIt is written in the Text-Books of Physics that if we give ∆E energy to some matter, then according to E=mc^2, its mass will increase by ∆m, where

∆m=∆E/c^2

Since the value of c is very high, the increase in mass ∆m is very small. For example, if we heat a substance, then the heat-energy given to this substance will increase its mass. But this increase in mass is so small that we cannot measure it even by the most sensitive balance. Similarly, if we compress a spring, its mass will increase, but we cannot confirm this mass-increase by any experiment.

Now the question is whether the change in mass as quoted in these two examples is reversible i.e. when the same substance of example one is cooled down, energy is produced equal to ∆m x c^2 (∆E=∆m x c^2) and in second example when we release the spring , energy is produced equal to ∆m x c^2 and initial mass is retained in both the cases ? Or the above changes are irreversible ?

on May 26, 2009 at 1:16 amAnirudh Kumar SatsangiE=mc^2 is called ‘Einstein’s energy-mass relation’. According to this relation, 1 kg mass of any matter is equivalent to 9×10^16J of energy. This is a huge amount of energy, equal to 2.5×10^10kWh. It is evident that the amount of energy is same irrespective of the matter taken, whether it is carbon, iron, copper or any other including radioactive elements. The amount of energy thus released does not depend on the atomic number, atomic weight, electronic configuration etc. It is the mass of the matter only based on which the amount of energy is calculated. It means that ‘mass’ is the connecting link between energy and matter.