| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Physics - Electromagnetic Forum » E=mc2 not quantitatively confirmed in bombs exploded on Hi
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| sciencecool@yahoo.co.uk |
 Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 11:42 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
E=mc2 not quantitatively confirmed in bombs exploded on Hiroshima
and Nagasaki in 1945 ? There is no data how much mass (m) is destroyed
and how much energy is emitted (E).
(i) Robert Serber (member of first American team entered
Hiroshima and Nagasaki in September 1945 to assess loses), has
indicated [1] that the efficiency of "Little Boy" weapon [U235 ,
49kg ] that was used against Hiroshima was about 2% only.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Serber , R The Los Alamos Primer (U.S. Govt. first published as
LA1, April 1946),
declassified 1965 , annotated book , 1992. also R
.. Serber (editor) , The Los Alamos Primer pp. 38 (Univ. of
California Press, 1992)
(ii) It is assumed that all the atoms don't undergo fission, thus
material is wasted. But no such waste material is specifically measured
quantitatively.
Thus the waste material (nuclear reactor or weapon) must be measured
and corresponding energy is calculated. Only then efficiency will be
explained, why it is 2%
(iii) But no measurements and calculations have been done till date.
Until such calculations and measurements are done specifically, it
cannot be said that E=mc2 is quantitatively confirmed in such cases.
The more information in this regard can be found and issue can be
discussed at
http://www.ajayonline.us |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joachim Pimiskern |
| Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:12 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"sciencecool@yahoo.co.uk" <sciencecool@sify.com> schrieb:
Quote: E=mc2 not quantitatively confirmed in bombs exploded on Hiroshima
and Nagasaki in 1945 ?
There's no need for a more complex formula
on T-shirts and cups.
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2005/emc2.html
Regards,
Joachim |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| sciencecool@yahoo.co.uk |
| Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2007 10:43 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Dear Joachim
Thanks for information. I am aware of it and it
is correct, there is no doubt.
But E=mc2 is used universally. It regarded as true in all cases, hence
must be confirmed in all cases individually.
Nuclear explosion is the one such case, being discussed.
(i) In nuclear explosion various forms of energies (heat , light, sound
energy, energy in form of invisible radiations is emitted. ) are
emitted.
(ii) Realistically Einstein’s E=mc2 is only meant for
Light Energy- Mass Conversions.
Light energy is emitted by body , mass of body decreases.
Then it is speculated for
heat energy
sound energy etc.
E=mc2 is derived for light energy only.
(iii) In nuclear explosions various types of energies are emitted
simultaneously. There is no harm if E=mc2 is precisely confirmed in
nuclear explosions. It is not done till.
See the authentic reference
[1] Serber , R The Los Alamos Primer (U.S. Govt. first published as
LA1, April 1946),
declassified 1965 , annotated book , 1992. also R . Serber
(editor), The Los Alamos Primer pp. 38 (Univ. of California Press,
1992)
(vi) Also in Chemical reactions , E=mc2 is not confirmed at all, the
reason given by scientists is that equipments are not sensitive enough
to check small amount of mass annihilated. It must be done in
scientific spirits.
(v) Also there are 3 decades old observations in nuclear fission of
certain elements
then energy emitted is not consistent with E=mc2.
[1]. Hambsch, F.J. et al. Nucl. Phys.A, 491,p.56 (1989)
[2]. Thiereus, H. et al., Phys. Rev. C, 23 P 2104 (1981)
[3] Bakhoum, E. G. Physics Essays, Vol.15, No 1 2002
(Preprint archive : physics/0206061)
So if attempts are made to confirm E=mc2 is in nuclear explosions and
chemical reactions, then it will help in better understanding of the
equation. In case of any deviation a new equation E = Ac2 m
is speculated or suggested.
This is the theme of post.
AJAY SHARMA
www.ajayonline.us |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Thu Jul 24, 2008 4:38 pm
|
|
