Transformation mass -> energy vice versa

In summary, the conversation discusses the potential use of the equation E=mc^2 for future transportation, specifically for converting the body into energy, transporting it, and converting it back into mass. However, there are challenges in recreating the same state of the body at the destination and it may be easier to use existing matter at the destination to recreate the body. The conversation also touches on the idea of using a particle accelerator to accelerate an astronaut without a spaceship, but this would require enormous energy and may not be practical. Other possible ideas are also mentioned.
  • #1
desert fox
8
0
Hello nice to meet all of you :smile:,

Could use the E=m.c2 for the future transportation (like a warp) by converting our body into the energy, transport it ,and convert it again to mass in the reality? :confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Welcome. Nice to meet you too. :smile:

In principle, yes. But I don't think you can recreate the same state (i.e. "you") at the destination. Also, once you have been destroyed, there's no need to send the energy anywhere. It would be easier to use matter that's already present at the destination to recreate you. For this to work, some information must be sent from the place where you were destroyed to the destination.
 
  • #3
Hmmmmm that's difficult but theoritically proven isn't? :rolleyes:

Just made way to construct again our body, from energy to mass isnt?
Someone have the idea? :confused:

Ah there's another problem:

In twin paradoks we know that the astronaut turns younger compared with people in earth.
If someone enter to the particle accelerator and speed up the particle accelerator as fast as astronout spaceship, Can that people turns younger?
 
  • #4
Hi desert fox,

IMO, the challenge isn't the conversion, it is simply the amount of information needed to recreate a body at the other end. Let's assume a standard 70 kg adult male composed entirely of water. Water is 18 g/mol, and contains 28 particles (protons, neutrons, and electrons) per molecule. That is a total of about 6.6E28 particles. Assuming only a classical 6 degrees of freedom per particle and single precision floating point representation that works out to about 1.3E31 bits of information. At just 50 nJ per bit that works out to 6.6E23 J just for the information itself. That is more than 1000 times the total world annual energy consumption, and at 50 nJ per bit you could probably transmit the information less than 1 km without corrupting too much of the data, even being optimistic.
 
  • #5
Welcome to PF!

desert fox said:
If someone enter to the particle accelerator and speed up the particle accelerator as fast as astronout spaceship, Can that people turns younger?

Hi desert fox! Welcome to PF! :smile:

Moving very fast can't make you younger, it can only stop you (well, almost) getting older.

Two problems though:

i] the g-forces (acceleration) would be enormous unless the centrifuge was very large … acceleration = v2/r, and time delay = √(1 - v2/c2), so aceeleration = c2(1 - (time delay)2)/r

ii] assuming you're inside the centrifuge, the outer wall and supporting structure of the centrifuge will be going even faster than you are (it might even have to go faster than light, which of course it can't), and will require tremendous energy and is extremely likely to break up! :smile:
 
  • #6


Assuming you're inside the centrifuge, the outer wall and supporting structure of the centrifuge will be going even faster than you are (it might even have to go faster than light, which of course it can't)

Faster than light? Please explained me
 
  • #7


desert fox said:
Faster than light? Please explained me

He said "you can't."
 
  • #8
desert fox said:
In twin paradoks we know that the astronaut turns younger compared with people in earth.
If someone enter to the particle accelerator and speed up the particle accelerator as fast as astronout spaceship, Can that people turns younger?
I don't understand this question at all. (I don't understand it even after reading Tiny-Tim's answer, which I also don't understand. (What centrifuge?)). Can you explain what you meant, or at least ask the question in a less confusing way? How does a person enter a particle accelerator? One particle at a time? Is the particle accelerator moving or just the particle beam? Is there a spaceship involved in this scenario nor not? Younger than what?
 
  • #9
"accelerator"

Hi Fredrik! :smile:
Fredrik said:
… How does a person enter a particle accelerator? One particle at a time? …

Yes, well that's why I assumed desert fox :smile: was using the word "accelerator" generically, as simply something that accelerates. :wink:
I don't understand this question at all. (I don't understand it even after reading Tiny-Tim's answer, which I also don't understand. (What centrifuge?))

Since astronauts can't be steered round a circle by using magnetic fields, I decided that the only practical "accelerators" would be mechanical.

And I was worried about the astronaut getting too the near the walls, so I decided to have the walls rotating with him.

That's a centrifuge! :biggrin:

:wink: if you've a better plan :rolleyes:
 
  • #10
I just want to make the different approach than the einstein did. He use the spacetravel example to explain his twin paradoks theory. I want the the different approach, my idea is try to accelerates the astronout without the spaceship.
The possible way to accelerates him/her is using the centrifuge force like the tiny-tim say.

My objective is to create the possible mechanism using the twin paradoks theory without the help of the spaceship. I mean that "thing" is possible to be build in our earth.

Anyone have the other idea?? :confused:
 
  • #11
This experiment has been done with two atomic clocks serving as "twins," and one riding in an fast moving jet-plane. It's not that much difference (jet-plane instead of spaceship), but it is different.
 
  • #12
I don't want to challenge the theory it was proven like lurch say but

desert fox said:
I mean that "thing" is possible to be build in our earth.

One of the possible way i think by using the particle accelerator mechanism.
But truly it's very difficult practically because required enourmous energy and it's instability.

Someone have the other idea? :confused:
 

FAQ: Transformation mass -> energy vice versa

What is the relationship between mass and energy in transformation?

The relationship between mass and energy in transformation is described by Einstein's famous equation, E=mc^2. This equation shows that mass and energy are two forms of the same thing, and can be converted into each other.

How does transformation from mass to energy occur?

Transformation from mass to energy can occur through processes such as nuclear fusion, nuclear fission, or particle annihilation. These processes involve the conversion of some of the mass of particles into energy in the form of photons or other particles.

Is the transformation from mass to energy reversible?

Yes, the transformation from mass to energy is reversible. This means that energy can be converted back into mass under certain conditions, such as in particle accelerators. However, the amount of energy required to convert back into the original mass is usually much greater than the amount of energy released in the initial transformation.

Can mass be created or destroyed in transformation?

No, mass cannot be created or destroyed in transformation. This is known as the law of conservation of mass, which states that the total mass of a closed system remains constant over time. However, mass can be transformed into energy and vice versa.

How is the transformation from mass to energy used in practical applications?

The transformation from mass to energy is used in numerous practical applications, such as nuclear power plants, nuclear weapons, and medical imaging technologies like PET scans. It is also a fundamental concept in understanding the behavior of particles in the universe, from the nuclear reactions that power stars to the formation of black holes.

Similar threads

Back
Top