# Discussion: Why $E = m{c}^{2}$?

One problem Einstein had to face while formulating his special relativity theory is that the first principles of physics still comes first. We must remember that the principles in Newtonian physics are not wrong; the details are just an approximation. His first argument is that objects moving in an inertial reference frame (not accelerating and in a straight line) must corroborate with the relations found in Newtonian mechanics (i.e. $F = \frac{dp}{dt}$). Hence, for the kinetic energy of a moving object, it must be shown that ${E}_{k} = \int _{ 0 }^{ v }{ Fdx } .$ Also, the kinetic energy ${E}_{k}$ will approach the classical value when the speed of the system approaches zero. Here we will derive the relativistic energy with first principles and calculus.

\begin{aligned} {E}_{k} &= \int _{ 0 }^{ v }{ Fdx } \\ &= \int _{ 0 }^{ v }{ \frac{dp}{dt}dx } \\ &=\int _{ 0 }^{ v }{d(\gamma mv) \frac{dx}{dt}} \\ &=m\int _{ 0 }^{ v }{{\gamma}^{3} vdv}\\ &=m\int _{ 0 }^{ v }{{\left(1-\frac{{v}^{2}}{{c}^{2}}\right)}^{-3/2} vdv} \\ &=m{c}^{2}\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{{v}^{2}}{{c}^{2}}}} -1\right) \end{aligned}

Note: It is easy to show that $\frac{d(\gamma v)}{dv} = {\gamma}^{3}$. Click Here

The total energy of the object, if it were moving would be ${E}_{k} + m{c}^{2}$. Even when you have a perfectly stationary massive object, there is still a lot of energy that is associated with its rest mass. Hence, if we let ${E}_{k}$ equal zero, we get $E = m{c}^{2}$. Therefore, $E = \frac{m{c}^{2}}{\sqrt{1-\frac{{v}^{2}}{{c}^{2}}}}.$

Finally we must test that the derived equation for ${E}_{k}$ recovers the kinetic energy in classical mechanics at non-relativistic speeds. By Taylor expansion, $m{c}^{2}\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{{v}^{2}}{{c}^{2}}}} -1\right) = m{c}^{2}\left(1+ \frac{1}{2}\frac{{v}^{2}}{{c}^{2}}+\frac{3}{8}\frac{{v}^{4}}{{c}^{4}}+ ... -1 \right)$

which the non-quadratic terms vanish for $v<. Therefore, ${E}_{k} = \frac{1}{2}m{v}^{2}.$

Check out my other notes at Proof, Disproof, and Derivation Note by Steven Zheng
5 years, 4 months ago

This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments should further the discussion of math and science.

When posting on Brilliant:

• Use the emojis to react to an explanation, whether you're congratulating a job well done , or just really confused .
• Ask specific questions about the challenge or the steps in somebody's explanation. Well-posed questions can add a lot to the discussion, but posting "I don't understand!" doesn't help anyone.
• Try to contribute something new to the discussion, whether it is an extension, generalization or other idea related to the challenge.

MarkdownAppears as
*italics* or _italics_ italics
**bold** or __bold__ bold
- bulleted- list
• bulleted
• list
1. numbered2. list
1. numbered
2. list
Note: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctly
paragraph 1paragraph 2

paragraph 1

paragraph 2

[example link](https://brilliant.org)example link
> This is a quote
This is a quote
    # I indented these lines
# 4 spaces, and now they show
# up as a code block.

print "hello world"
# I indented these lines
# 4 spaces, and now they show
# up as a code block.

print "hello world"
MathAppears as
Remember to wrap math in $$ ... $$ or $ ... $ to ensure proper formatting.
2 \times 3 $2 \times 3$
2^{34} $2^{34}$
a_{i-1} $a_{i-1}$
\frac{2}{3} $\frac{2}{3}$
\sqrt{2} $\sqrt{2}$
\sum_{i=1}^3 $\sum_{i=1}^3$
\sin \theta $\sin \theta$
\boxed{123} $\boxed{123}$

Sort by:

But how does one discover that one of the "first principles" should be that $p=\gamma mv$, and not the Newtonian $p=mv$? Some "first principles" are just more "first-er" than other "first principles". Einstein didn't start there. But it's a good exposition, once we've accepted that $p=\gamma mv$

- 5 years, 4 months ago

True, the original Newtonian equation for momentum is "first-er" but we must know that we are now working in the relativistic framework. In relativity, if we increase velocity, the mass gets heavier. In many introductory textbooks, they refer the rest mass as ${m}_{0}$ and $m = \gamma {m}_{0}$. I just dropped the subscript.

- 5 years, 4 months ago

Wonderful

- 5 years, 4 months ago

i have a question, how did you get gamma^3? Can you explain it to me,Bu what a great note!!

- 5 years, 4 months ago

Sure. Here you go gamma factor identities

- 5 years, 4 months ago

how e(k)=mc^2 when v=0 ???

- 5 years, 4 months ago

I said it doesn't make sense (linguistically) but there is a tremendous amount of rest mass in you if you are stationary.

- 5 years, 4 months ago

At the first place, it doesnt make sense mathematically. Setting v=0 in the formula for E(k), i get e(k)=0. Am i wrong???

- 5 years, 4 months ago

I see. I should have wrote that if ${E}_{k}$ is zero, the energy equals $m{c}^{2}$.

- 5 years, 4 months ago

Yes, absolutely! When i saw that, i totally didnt follow the rest of the text.

- 5 years, 4 months ago