Mass-energy Equivalence

About Mass-Energy Equivalence

Click here to go to the UPSCALE home page.
Click here to go to the JPU200Y home page.
Click here to go to the Physics Virtual Bookshelf.

Author
This document was written in February 2002 by David M. Harrison, Dept. of Physics, Univ. of Toronto,
[Link] This document is Copyright © 2002 David M. Harrison.

This is $Revision: 1.2 $, $Date: 2002/04/10 [Link] $ (year/month/day UTC).

Introduction
In this little document we justify Einstein's famous equation E = mc2. We shall need to know:

● That according to the Special Theory of Relativity velocities do not add in the simple way that our "common
sense" says.
● That in the worldview of Special Relativity spacetime has four dimensions.
● The time squared minus the distance squared is the same number for all observers.

The discussion is mostly non-mathematical but non-trivial.

Non-relativistic Sticky Collisions

In this section we discuss non-relativistic collisions and the Principle of Inertia. Since the discussion is non-relativistic
the results should conform to our "common sense" about what should happen.

To the right we show two objects approaching each other

at 60 km/hr relative to us. We shall assume that the two
objects have equal masses and are constructed of a
"sticky" material.

[Link] (1 of 5) [4/10/02 [Link] AM]

Mass-energy Equivalence

When they two objects collide they stick together. Since

before the collision the two objects had equal masses and
were moving in opposite directions at the same speeds,
their inertia or momenta were equal and opposite. Thus
after the collision they will be stationary relative to us.
This is an example of the Principle of Inertia, also called
Conservation of Momentum.

Now we imagine looking at the same collision for the

reference frame of an observer moving to the left at 60
km/hr relative to the first one. The right hand (red) ball
will be stationary for this person, but the left hand (blue)
ball will be moving at 60 + 60 = 120 km/hr.

After the collision, the two balls stick together. Since the
two balls that are stuck together have twice the mass of
the left-hand (blue) ball by itself, after the collision the
speed of the two must be one-half of 120 km/hr, i.e. 60
km/hr. Since for the first observer the two balls are
stationary after the collision and the second observer is
moving to the left at 60 km/hr, we can predict that after
the collision the two balls will be moving at 60 km/hr
relative to the second observer. So we have two ways of
getting the result shown to the right: from Conservation
of Momentum or from Galilean relativity.

Relativistic Sticky Collisions

Now we do a similar analysis, but this time

the balls are moving at relativistic speeds.
Their speeds are 60% of the speed of light
relative to the shown observer Sue. We
should emphasise that relative to Sue the
balls have the same mass and are moving
at the same speeds in opposite directions.

[Link] (2 of 5) [4/10/02 [Link] AM]

Mass-energy Equivalence

Thus, after the collision the Principle of

Inertia says that the balls will be stationary
relative to Sue.

Now we imagine an observer Lou who is

moving to the left at 60% of the speed of
light relative to Sue. The right-hand (red)
ball will be stationary relative to Lou. The
left-hand (blue) ball will be moving to the
right relative to him. But because these are
relativistic speeds, the left-hand ball will
be moving at a speed less than 0.6c + 0.6c
= 1.2c. It turns out that the speed of the left-
hand ball is 0.88c.

Now we have a problem. The Principle of

Inertia predicts that after the collision the
speed of the balls will be one-half of 0.88c,
i.e. 0.44c. But if the balls were stationary
relative to Sue after the collision and Lou
is moving to the left at 0.6c relative to Sue,
then surely the balls must be moving to the
right at 0.6c relative to Lou. So
Conservation of Momentum and Galilean
relativity predict different results.

When Einstein was confronted with this, he refused to throw out the Principle of Inertia. Therefore, he concluded that
before the collision, relative to Lou the mass of the left-hand (blue) ball must be greater than the mass of the right-hand
(red) ball. Thus when an object is moving relative to some observer its mass increases as the speed increases. So the last
figure above is correct.

It turns out that the relation between the mass m the body has when it is moving at speed v
relative to an observer is related to the mass m0 it has relative to an observer for whom the
body is at rest is given by the equation shown to the right. The quantity m0 is called the rest
mass of the body. For Lou, before the collision the mass of the left-hand (blue) ball is greater than its rest mass by a
factor of 2.11.

[Link] (3 of 5) [4/10/02 [Link] AM]

Mass-energy Equivalence

Energy
Energy is a concept that has undergone continuous revision since the days of Newton. Originally it referred to a property
that bodies have because they are in motion; today that property is called the kinetic energy. Other forms of energy have
been discovered since then, with names like potential energy, heat energy, etc. Notice that the kinetic energy is another
property, like inertia or momentum, that bodies have because of their motion.

Einstein realised that the fact that masses increase when they are moving relative to us means that the kinetic energy of a
body could be related to this increase in mass. So the kinetic energy of a body is somehow related to the increase in mass:

kinetic energy ~ m - m0

However, the units of this are wrong. Energy units are a mass times a speed squared. In everyday units, this is a kg times
a meter per second squared, which we call a joule. Above we say the energy goes only as the mass.

Relativity taught us that we made a mistake when we measured time in "sacred" units of seconds instead of everyday
units of meters. And we learned that we can use the speed of light c as a conversion factor for units. We can apply that
realisation to the above to multiply the masses to the speed of light squared to get the units to come out right:

kinetic energy = (m - m0) c2

Einstein showed in 1905 that the above gives the Newtonian form for kinetic energy when the speed of the object v is
small compared to the speed of light c.

Now, when the object is at rest relative to an observer, it has no kinetic energy. However what are we to make of the left-
over term:

m0 c2

Einstein realised that this is yet another form of energy, a form that arises because of the body's rest mass. And the total
energy of a body that is moving is this "rest energy" plus its kinetic energy. So:

Energy E = m0 c2 + (m - m0) c2 = m c2

Dimensionality of Spacetime
You will recall that in the worldview of Special Relativity, spacetime has four dimensions, the three spatial dimensions
and the time dimension. Here we explore the consequences of this for energy. We shall be slightly mathematical, and will
"push the envelope" a bit in terms of sophistication.

Now, the inertia or momentum of a body is related to its mass and its speed. But there is a bit more information than just
this. The momentum of an object travelling, say, North is different than the momentum of an object travelling East or an
object travelling up. So the momentum has three components, corresponding to the three spatial dimensions. By
convention the momentum is given the symbol p, so the three components can be specified as px, py and pz

[Link] (4 of 5) [4/10/02 [Link] AM]

Mass-energy Equivalence

But spacetime has four dimensions. What can be the fourth time component of the momentum? A natural candidate is the
other quantity that an object has related to its motion, its energy. So it is natural to say the the energy is the fourth
component of the momentum.

The dimensions here don't quite work out. Momentum is a mass times a speed, while energy is a mass times a speed
squared. But we can once again fix up the units using c. Multiply the spatial momenta by c and they will have the same
units as the energy.

So to describe the position of an event occurring in spacetime we specify the four coordinates:

position = ct, x, y, z

To describe the relativistic momentum of an object we similarly specify its four components:

momentum = E, cpx, cpy, cpz

Finally, earlier we saw that although for different observers the time and position of some event may be different, there is
a constant for all observers:

(ct)2 - x2 - y2 - z2

Similarly, although the momentum and energy of an object is different for different observers, there is a constant here
too, the time component squared minus the spatial components squared:

E2 - (cpx)2 - (cpy)2 - (cpz)2

What can the value of this quantity be? We could go through all the math, but there is an easier approach. When the
object is at rest with respect to us, it has no spatial momentum and its energy is just the rest energy. And if this is the
value for an observer at rest relative to the object, then it must be the value for all observers.

E2 - (cpx)2 - (cpy)2 - (cpz)2 = (m0 c2) 2

In words, the value of the relativistic momentum squared is the rest mass squared.

[Link] (5 of 5) [4/10/02 [Link] AM]