We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings. Learn more about our Privacy Notice... [opens in a new tab]
How to Submit
Browse
Events
Communities
About

A New Perspective on the Einstein’s Kinetic Energy

31 March 2025, Version 1
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This content is an early or alternative research output and has not been peer-reviewed by Cambridge University Press at the time of posting.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

Albert Einstein found that the relativistic mass-energy equation of an object with non-zero mass, where the velocity of the object approaches the speed of light with zero mass, is equal to the sum of kinetic energy and rest-mass energy of the object. But the author of this article finds that the Einstein’s kinetic energy is not consistent with its related definition and fundamental equation in the domain of mechanics.

Keywords

relativistic motion
non-zero mass
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 31, 2025 Version 1

Metrics

Article has an altmetric score of 1
26
6
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-2025-7ptvv
D O I: 10.33774/coe-2025-7ptvv [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