How to Submit
Browse
Events
Communities
About

Derivation of the Einstein’s Mass-Energy Equation from the Newton’s Second Law of Motion

24 March 2025, Version 5
Working Paper
This content is an early or alternative research output and has not been peer-reviewed by Cambridge University Press at the time of posting.

Abstract

In the Einstein’s theory of special relativity, the relativistic mechanics is concerned with the motion of bodies whose velocities approach the speed of light. It is understood the velocity of a moving particle with non-zero mass is always less than the speed of light with zero mass. So, the speed of light is the upper limit for all moving objects in the universe. This paper presents an efficiency mass-energy equation instead of the Einstein’s mass-energy equivalence.

Keywords

relativistic motion
momentum equation
kinetic energy
rest mass energy

Comments

Comments are not moderated before they are posted, but they can be removed by the site moderators if they are found to be in contravention of our Commenting and Discussion Policy [opens in a new tab] - please read this policy before you post. Comments should be used for scholarly discussion of the content in question. You can find more information about how to use the commenting feature here [opens in a new tab] .
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy [opens in a new tab] and Terms of Service [opens in a new tab] apply.

Version History

Mar 24, 2025 Version 5

Version Notes

In the new version, the author has justified that the Einstein’s mass-energy equivalence (E) = mc^2 is wrong . The right one is E = mv^2 , where v < c.

Metrics

1,408
959
0
Views
Downloads
Citations

License

CC logo
CC
BY logo
BY
The content is available under CC BY 4.0 [opens in a new tab]

DOI

10.33774/coe-2023-ck6jr-v5
D O I: 10.33774/coe-2023-ck6jr-v5 [opens in a new tab]

Author’s competing interest statement

The author(s) have declared they have no conflict of interest with regard to this content

Ethics

The author(s) have declared ethics committee/IRB approval is not relevant to this content

Share