On the Philosophical Nature of Einstein’s Mass-Energy Equivalence Formula $$E=mc^{2}$$ E = m c 2

Foundations of Science 19 (4):319-329 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The historical development of the famous Einstein formula \ is briefly discussed. In this paper, on the basis of the Einstein viewpoint a new general approach is proposed for demonstrating the correctness of the formula \ . It is can be seen that the generalized approach leads to Einstein’s famous formula, too. During recent years, various papers have been published concerning the incompleteness of this famous formula. It is demonstrated that the presented claims in these articles are not mathematically legitimate. It is clear that there are still some important misunderstandings concerning the interpretation of Einstein’s mass-energy equivalence formula

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Interpretations of Einstein’s Equation E = mc 2.Francisco Flores - 2005 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 19 (3):245-260.
Mass, matter, and energy. A relativistic approach.Eftichios Bitsakis - 1991 - Foundations of Physics 21 (1):63-81.
Einstein’s 1935 Derivation of E=mc2.Francisco Flores - 1998 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 29 (2):223-243.
Origins of Rest Mass Energy in Einstein's derivations.Ajay Sharma - 2011 - Apeiron: Studies in Infinite Nature 18 (4):385.
The Mass of the Gravitational Field.Charles T. Sebens - 2022 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 73 (1):211-248.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-10-26

Downloads
58 (#271,353)

6 months
3 (#1,002,413)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Did Einstein prove E=mc2?Hans C. Ohanian - 2009 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 40 (2):167-173.
A comment on Mermin's “Understanding Einstein's 1905 derivation of E=mc2”.Hans C. Ohanian - 2012 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 43 (3):215-217.
Did Einstein prove E=mc2?Hans C. Ohanian - 2009 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 40 (2):167-173.
A comment on Mermin's “Understanding Einstein's 1905 derivation of E=mc2”.Hans C. Ohanian - 2012 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 43 (3):215-217.
Reply to Ohanian's comment.N. David Mermin - 2012 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 43 (3):218-219.

View all 11 references / Add more references