Short Bytes: Prior to Einstein’s theory of special relativity, mass and energy were considered different entities. In 1905, German-born physicist Albert Einstein proposed that both are interconvertible and energy is released in this process. In a recent development, an Indian researcher Ajay Sharma has claimed that Albert Einstein’s mass-energy equation hasn’t been completely studied under all circumstances and it is inadequate.
Mr. Sharma writes in his paper that Einstein considered just two light waves of equal energy emitted in opposite direction with constant relative velocity. “There are numerous possibilities for the parameters which аre not considered in Einstein’s derivation ∆E=∆mc2 is obtained from ∆L=∆mc2 by simply replacing L by E (all energy) without derivation,” he writes.
Einstein proposed the world renowned equation in 1905. The equation proposes that increase in the relativistic mass of a body comes from the kinetic energy of the body divided by the square of the speed of light i.e. ∆m= E/c2.
Mr. Ajay Sharma is the assistant director for education with the Himachal Pradesh government. As mentioned above, he stresses on the fact that Einstein considered mass and energy the same physical entity that can be changed into each other.
Einstein simply arrived at E=mc2 from L=mc2 by replacing L by E (all energy) without derivation.
“It’s illogical,” he said.
His paper further mentions that W.L. Fadner correctly pointed out this flaw as Einstein did not mention E in the derivation.
Interestingly, in his book Beyond Einstein and E=mc2, Mr. Sharma says that Einstein was not the original propounder of the theory of relativity. Instead, he ripped off the existing work of Galileo (1632, Principle of Relativity), Poincare (1898, Constancy of Velocity of Light), Lorentz (1892, Variation of Mass etc), Larmer (1897, Time Dilation), and Fitzegerald (1889, Length Contraction).
To know more about Mr. Sharma’s work, you can read his technical paper — The mathematical derivation or speculation of E=mc2, in Einstein’s September 1905 paper, and some peculiar experiments.
Add your views about Mr. Sharma’s work in the comments below.